Neshaminy Creek Crossing Project FINAL REPORT

Transcription

Neshaminy Creek Crossing Project
East Coast Greenway (ECG) Feasibility Study & Ecological Assessment
FINAL REPORT
DECEMBER 2013
Acknowledgements
East Coast Greenway Feasibility Study & Ecological Assessment
December 2013
This project was funded in part by a Keystone Recreation, Park and Conservation
Grant administered by the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural
Resources, Bureau of Recreation and Conservation and with the generous support
of the William Penn Foundation.
The views expressed herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect
those of PA DCNR, nor any of its sub-agencies, and the William Penn Foundation.
PROJECT SPONSORS
Pennsylvania Environmental Council (PEC)
1315 Walnut Street, Suite 532
Philadelphia, PA 19106
Redevelopment Authority of the County of Bucks (RDA)
One North Wilson Avenue
Bristol, PA 19007
CONSULTANT TEAM
Urban Engineers, Inc.
530 Walnut Street, 7th Floor
Philadelphia, PA 19106
with
Conestoga-Rovers & Associates, Inc.
410 Eagleview Blvd., Suite 110
Exton, PA 19341
2
December 2013
Table of Contents
SECTIONS
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Planning Context
Stakeholder Involvement
Existing Conditions
Bridge Feasibility Analysis
East Coast Greenway (ECG) Trail Connections
Ecological Enhancement Concepts
Next Steps
LIST OF APPENDICES
4
7
8
14
18
28
38
Appendix A:
Appendix B:
Appendix C:
Appendix D:
Appendix E:
Meeting Materials
Conceptual Bridge Designs
Alternatives Analysis Materials
Ecological Enhancement Concept Plans
ECG Conceptual Cost Estimate
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1:
Figure 2:
Figure 3:
Figure 4:
Figure 5:
Figure 6:
Figure 7:
Figure 8:
Figure 9:
Figure 10:
Figure 11:
Figure 12:
Figure 13:
Figure 14:
Figure 15:
Figure 16:
Figure 17:
Pennsylvania Environmental Council
December 2013
The Circuit - Regional Trail Network
Study Area
Neshaminy State Park Trail Map
Neshaminy State Park Resource Inventory
Bridge Crossing Alternatives
Proposed ECG Alignment
Dunksferry Road Sections
Alignment for Segment A
Alignment for Segment B
State Road Sections
Alignment for Segment C
4th Avenue Sections
Ecological Enhancement Keymap
Area 1 Concept Plan
Area 2 Concept Plan
Area 3 Concept Plan
Area 4 Concept Plan
3
1 - Planning Context
The Pennsylvania Environmental Council (PEC), in cooperation with the Bucks
County Redevelopment Authority (RDA), initiated this project to evaluate the
feasibility of a new bicycle and pedestrian crossing of Neshaminy Creek in Bucks
County, Pennsylvania. Neshaminy Creek forms the boundary between Bensalem
and Bristol Townships, and also passes through Neshaminy State Park as it
approaches the Delaware River. Through this project, PEC aims to complete a
key gap in the East Coast Greenway (ECG) trail network, while at the same time
enhancing the ecological and recreational value of Neshaminy State Park. To
further elaborate, the main goals of this project are to:
Fill a critical gap in the East Coast Greenway network:
The East Coast Greenway (ECG) began as a vision to create the nation’s first
urban, long distance, multi-use trail by linking 23 major cities in 15 states
along the Atlantic coast to form a continuous route between Maine and
Florida. The ECG is intended to accommodate a variety of non-motorized
users, including bicyclists, in-line skaters, pedestrians, and wheelchair users.
A principal goal of the East Coast Greenway Alliance is to provide a nonmotorized arterial route for recreation, tourism and commuting, while also
spurring revitalization and enhancing community livability. The Neshaminy
Creek Crossing Project will help to further this goal by linking the planned
Bensalem Greenway along State Road in Bensalem Township to planned
ECG trail connections in Bristol Township.
Expand local and regional opportunities for biking and walking:
Existing pedestrian and bicycle access to Neshaminy State Park is severely
restricted, which forces most people to drive to the park to enjoy its
resources. This project has the potential to provide local residents with
non-motorized access to Neshaminy State Park, as well as other destinations
along State Road. In the Greater Philadelphia region, this segment of the
ECG will be part of a 750-mile planned network of interconnected trails
known as “The Circuit” (shown in Figure 1), and will directly connect with
several trails including the proposed Neshaminy Creek Trail and Bensalem
Greenway.
4
December 2013
Figure 1: The Circuit - Regional Trail Network
To Easton, the Poconos &
Wilkes-Barre
To Bethlehem
D & L TRAIL
LIBERTY BELL
TRAIL
To New Brunswick,
Newark, and NYC
QUAKERTOWN
EAST BRANCH
PERKIOMEN
the
BUCKS
NEW HOPE
PRINCETON
DOYLESTOWN-NEW HOPE
CONNECTOR
To Reading, Pottsville &
Appalachian Tr.
LAWRENCEHOPEWELL TRAIL
DOYLESTOWN
PERKIOMEN
TRAIL
LIBERTY BELL
TRAIL
D & L TRAIL
D&R
TOWPATH
POTTSTOWN
D&R CANAL (ECG)
202 PARKWAY
TRAIL
SKIPPACK
TRAIL
SCHUYLKILL
RIVER TRAIL (SRT)
TRENTON
POWER LINE
TRAIL
E x i s t i n g Tr a i l s
MERCER
NESHAMINY
CREEK
Tr a i l s i n P r o g r e s s
D & L TRAIL (ECG)
P l a n n e d Tr a i l s
CROSS COUNTY
TRAIL
PHOENIXVILLE
CRESHEIM
VALLEY
STRUBLE
TRAIL
CHESTER
TOOKANYTACONY
NEWTOWN SQR
BRANCH TRAIL
DARBY CREEK
TRAIL
ECG
DELAWARE RIVER
HERITAGE TRAIL
MERCHANTVILLE
TRAIL
SRT/ECG
DELAWARE
MT. HOLLY PEMBERTON
TRAIL
RANCOCAS
GREENWAY
COOPER RIVER
TRAIL
COBBS (ECG)
OCTORARA
TRAIL
SRT
KINKORA
TRAIL
PROJECT LOCATION
CYNWYD
TRAIL
DOWNINGTOWN
BRANDYWINE
TRAIL
WISSAHICKON
TRAIL
FORGE TO
REFUGE TR.
CHESTER VALLEY
TRAIL
CHESTER VALLEY
TRAIL
To Harrisburg
BURLINGTON
CHESTER VALLEY
EXTENSION
RADNOR TRAIL
STRUBLE
TRAIL
EAST COAST
GREENWAY
SRT
UWCHLAN
TRAIL
DELAWARE RIVER
HERITAGE TRAIL
PENNYPACK
TRAIL
TIDAL
SCHUYL TR
BURLINGTON
JOHN HEINZ
NWR TRAIL
CHESTER CREEK
TRAIL
EAST ALANTIC
BIKEWAY
EAST COAST
GREENWAY
BLACKWOOD
RAIL TRAIL
GLOUCESTER COUNTY
LIGHT RAIL W/ TRAIL
CAMDEN
To Wilmington, Baltimore,
and Washington, DC
MONROE TWP.
BIKE PATH
GLASSBORO
BRIDGETON
RAIL TRAIL
0
5
10
May 2012
To Bridgeton
December 2013
5
Preserve and enhance the ecological and recreational value of
Neshaminy State Park:
Neshaminy State Park is a 300-acre programmed park with a swimming
pool, walking trails, and 370-boat slip marina. Located at the confluence
of Neshaminy Creek and the Delaware River, the park offers a view of the
Philadelphia skyline at Logan Point. The park contains a variety of natural
resources and habitat, ranging from tidal wetlands along the southern and
northern banks of Neshaminy Creek to coastal plain forests. At the same
time, the park faces challenges including invasive species, underutilized
areas, and erosion along its Delaware River shoreline.
6
December 2013
2 - Stakeholder Involvement
Study Team
Public Meeting
The Study Team for this project was comprised of the Pennsylvania Environmental
Council (PEC), Urban Engineers, Inc. (Urban), and Conestoga–Rovers & Associates
(CRA). PEC, who is currently spearheading the completion of both the East Coast
Greenway (ECG) and The Circuit trail networks in Southeast Pennsylvania, managed
the stakeholder coordination and public outreach efforts. As the prime consultant,
Urban led the Bridge Feasibility Analysis and ECG trail planning tasks. CRA
performed natural resource analysis and habitat assessment for the study area and
developed ecological restoration concepts for Neshaminy State Park.
A Public Meeting was held on November 6th, 2013 from 5:00pm to 7:00pm at
The Playmasters Theatre in Neshaminy State Park to gather feedback from local
residents and answer questions about the project. In addition to members
of the Study Team, the meeting was attended by 18 individuals representing
residents, local organizations, as well as state, county, and municipal
agencies. The Study Team delivered a slideshow presentation covering the
project background, bridge feasibility analysis, proposed trail alignment,
and ecological restoration concepts. The presentation was followed by a
substantial question and answer session, which is documented in Appendix
A. Display boards showing potential bridge/trail alternatives and ecological
restoration concepts were also set up in the room. Participants were provided
time to review displays and interact directly with members of the Study Team.
A meeting advertisement (included in Appendix A) was distributed by email
and via social media links to key stakeholder groups and posted on municipal
websites. The meeting was covered by local press, who interviewed key
members of the Study Team. A copy of the news article is also included in
Appendix A.
Steering Committee
A Steering Committee was formed to guide the study process. The committee
included stakeholders from the Pennsylvania Environmental Council (PEC),
Redevelopment Authority of Bucks County (RDA), Pennsylvania Department of
Conservation & Natural Resources (DCNR), Bucks County Planning Commission,
East Coast Greenway Alliance (ECGA), and the Philadelphia Regional Port Authority
(PRPA). Two Steering Committee meetings were held over the course of the project
(minutes are included in Appendix A):
Steering Committee Meeting #1 and Field View (February 14, 2013)
Stakeholder Meetings
A kickoff meeting was held to familiarize the Steering Committee with the
project. Urban presented an overview of the project scope and schedule,
which was followed by a discussion about data needs, parcel ownership,
and potentially challenging areas. The group identified and decided on the
potential bridge crossing corridors to be evaluated. Following the meeting,
the group walked portions of the study area to understand existing conditions
and identify potential concepts.
The Study Team met with key stakeholders over the course of the project
to discuss specific project elements. The team also coordinated with other
entities including PennDOT and the US Coast Guard. A list of the meetings is
provided below (meeting minutes are included in Appendix A):
Steering Committee Meeting #2 (June 5, 2013)
Urban presented results from the bridge feasibility analysis and received
feedback from Steering Committee members. The Steering Committee
discussed and agreed on a preferred bridge crossing corridor and also
evaluated proposed trail alignments for the East Coast Greenway.
December 2013
Group
Subject
Date
Philadelphia Regional Port Authority
Marina Alignments
April 23, 2013
Bensalem Township
ECG Alignment
August 20, 2013
Bristol Township
ECG Alignment
October 2, 2013
7
3 - Existing Conditions
Study Area
The project study area is located in Bensalem and Bristol Townships, Bucks
County, Pennsylvania (see Figure 2). The study area extends from Dunksferry
Road in Bensalem Township to Cedar Avenue in Bristol Township and from State
Road to the Delaware River. This includes the entirety of Neshaminy State Park
(NSP), along with portions of the Croydon neighborhood in Bristol Township. The
study area also includes the former Jack’s Marina site, which is currently being
designed and permitted as a wetland mitigation site by the Philadelphia Regional
Port Authority (PRPA), and a privately-operated marina along the Delaware River
located within NSP.
The Neshaminy Creek, which flows south through the center of the study area
and feeds into the Delaware River, presents challenges to completing an East
Coast Greenway (ECG) trail connection. While previous and ongoing planning
efforts for the ECG have approached the study area, they have not determined
a feasible way to cross the creek. From the southwest direction (Philadelphia),
the proposed ECG route – the Bensalem Greenway – runs along State Road and
terminates at the entrance to Neshaminy State Park at Dunksferry Road. From
the northeast direction (Bristol Borough), the proposed ECG route is planned
to approach the study area via the River Road corridor. This current study will
address the “gap” between these two points.
Site visits were conducted to refine and confirm the base mapping in key areas.
Field measurements and photographs were used to check information from the
GIS mapping, including edge of pavement, drainage features, slopes, specimen
trees, and other natural features.
Transportation Inventory
The primary transportation corridor through the study area is State Road (SR
2002), which is owned and maintained by PennDOT. Other PennDOT-owned
roads within or near the study area include Haunted Lane (SR 2009) and the
portion of Cedar Avenue (SR 2011) north of State Road. All other public roads
in the study area are owned and maintained by the respective Townships,
or by DCNR within Neshaminy State Park. The table below highlights key
characteristics of State Road between Dunskferry Road and Cedar Avenue:
State Road Segment
Between Dunksferry Rd &
Neshaminy Creek
Between Neshaminy Creek &
Cedar Ave
Lane Width
AADT
Speed Limit
11 feet
+/- 13,000 veh
40 mph
11 feet
+/- 12,000 veh
35 mph
Base Mapping
The following data layers were used to develop base mapping for the study area
(source is listed in parentheses):
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
8
Aerial photography (2008 PAMAP imagery)
Topography (2-foot interval contours from PAMAP)
Parcel lines with ownership (Bucks County Planning Commission)
State Road Right-of-Way Record (PennDOT)
100-year floodplain and floodway (FEMA)
Neshaminy State Park - trail system, management areas, and plant
communities (DCNR)
Approximate habitat boundaries (Conestoga-Rovers, Inc.)
The study area is not conducive to walking or biking. Sidewalks are not present
along State Road, and while the State Road Bridge has a 5-foot wide sidewalk on
the north side, there are no sidewalks leading up to the bridge in either direction.
On the Bristol side, there is a footpath leading up to the bridge in the lawn area of
the adjacent property. There is also a short footpath on the Bensalem side, which
quickly disappears as the embankment slope and guiderail forces pedestrians
into the vehicular travel lane.
December 2013
Figure 2: Study Area
1st
ve
ily A
Em
ve
dA
ing
Ave
Ave
ve
hA
4t
ylan
m
Wyo
Ave
2nd
ve
hA
ve
hA
6t
Mar
n
ow
Br
Bensalem
Township
Ave
isty
Chr
Ave
ve
ar A
Ced 2011)
(SR
3rd
ve
kA
Yor
New
5t
95
2)
200
(SR
d
a
o
te R
Sta
Ros
e
Av
r
ve
aA
sD
e
Av
Ave
p
Pro
Rive
r Rd
ent
nm
Alig
G
d EC
ose
Ave
Ave
Ave
h
t
Pa
Jack’s
Marina
2nd
3rd
4th
el
av
Gr
nk
sfe
h
Pat
vel
Rd
Gra
rr y
Neshaminy Creek
2)
00
2
(SR
1st
e
e Av
war
Dela
Du
lk
Wa
an
e
Av
e
Av
Fir
Elm
Neshaminy
State Park
al Dr
Centr
g
Lo
s
E. Ba
t
en
nm
g
i
l
GA
EC
Neshaminy
State Park
in Dr
nk
in Dr
Du
as
W. B
ed
os
sa
s Ln
ad
Ro
e
t
a
St
p
Pro
Ro
e
r Av
all
ve
ler A
Mil
k
Win
M
sh
ar
Ave
e
r Av
Ave
Ave
a
Ced
5th
6th
2009)
ve
ler A
Mil
Ln
ler
Mil
elsio
Exc
Bristol
Township
(SR
Haunted Ln
s
re
og
Pr
sfe
rr y
Rd
D
iver
re R
a
w
ela
Unpaved Trail
Bucks County, PA
December 2013
Sources:
Aerial Imagery: PAMAP, 2008
Habitat Characteristics: CRA, 2013
North
December 2013
9
With the exception of Dunksferry Road, crosswalks are not marked at
any of the intersections with State Road. State Road does not have
bicycle lanes or markings, and the shoulders are uneven with large
sections that are not suitable for biking, due to either insufficient width
or other obstructions. Similarly, the local street network does not have
sidewalks or bicycle markings.
On the other hand, Neshaminy State Park features an extensive network
of paved and unpaved trails (shown in Figure 3). A paved trail known as
Logan Walk runs parallel to State Road and is the main spine of activity.
Other trails include the River Walk, which is a scenic, unpaved hiking trail
extending along the water’s edge (referred to as the “outer trail”), and a
gravel trail circling the former soil factory area (referred to as the “inner
trail”).
State Road Bridge - Bensalem Township Approach
State Road approaching Neshaminy Creek in Bensalem Township
10
River Walk Trail in Neshaminy State Park
December 2013
Figure 3: Neshaminy State Park Trail Map
Source: PADCNR Recreational Guide, 2009
December 2013
11
Ecological Resource Inventory
Concurrent with the trail planning effort, a comprehensive environmental
inventory of the study area was undertaken to identify environmental resources
and constraints that could potentially influence the bridge crossing and trail
alignments. Biologists from CRA conducted field studies within the project
area to identify the location and extent of sensitive environmental resources
including wetlands, plant communities, and critical habitats for rare, threatened,
or endangered species. Resources within the study area include tidal wetlands,
non-tidal wetlands, coastal plain forest, riparian forest, and the “sand dunes”
area. These resource areas were categorized and delineated on the study area
basemapping (see Figure 4). In addition, areas within NSP where wetland
mitigation and ecological enhancements could be accomplished were identified.
Tidal Wetlands
Sand Dunes Area
12
Coastal Plain Forest
December 2013
Figure 4: Neshaminy State Park Resource Inventory
1st
ve
ily A
Em
ve
dA
ing
Ave
Ave
ve
hA
4t
ylan
m
Wyo
Ave
2nd
ve
hA
ve
hA
6t
Mar
n
ow
Br
Bensalem
Township
Ave
isty
Chr
Ave
ve
ar A
Ced 2011)
(SR
3rd
ve
kA
Yor
New
5t
95
2)
200
(SR
d
a
o
te R
Sta
Phragmites
Dominated
ve
aA
r
Ros
e
Av
sD
Ro
sa
e
r Av
e
Av
all
ve
ler A
Mil
Rive
r Rd
s Ln
k
Win
M
sh
ar
Ave
e
r Av
Ave
a
Ced
5th
Ave
2009)
ve
ler A
Mil
Ln
ler
Mil
elsio
Exc
Bristol
Township
6th
(SR
Haunted Ln
s
re
og
Pr
Ave
Ave
sfe
Habitat Characteristics
Tidal Flat/Wetlands
h
Pat
vel
Rd
Gra
rr y
e
Av
e
Av
Fir
lk
Wa
1st
nk
Elm
an
Ave
Ave
Jack’s
Marina
2nd
3rd
4th
h
t
Pa
Du
Neshaminy Creek
el
av
Gr
ad
Ro
e
t
a
St
e
e Av
war
Dela
Sand
Dunes
2)
00
2
(SR
Riparian Woodland
Neshaminy
State Park
Coastal Plain Woodland
al Dr
Centr
g
Lo
Herbaceous Meadow
s
E. Ba
in Dr
Former
Soil
Factory
Sand Dunes
nk
in Dr
Du
as
W. B
Black Locust
sfe
rr y
Rd
D
iver
re R
a
w
ela
Unpaved Trail
Former Dredge
Disposal Area
Bucks County, PA
December 2013
Sources:
North
N
December 2013
13
4 - Bridge Feasibility Analysis
A key objective of this project was to determine the feasibility of establishing an
East Coast Greenway (ECG) connection over the Neshaminy Creek. The presence
of numerous physical and environmental constraints led to the development and
evaluation of a number of bridge crossing alternatives, which either (a) use the
existing State Road corridor or (b) cross the Neshaminy Creek on a new structure
within Neshaminy State Park (NSP). Three locations for a new crossing within the
park were identified. The alternatives (shown in Figure 5) are described below:
and ecological resources in the area, three distinct bridge configurations were
evaluated:
•
•
Alternative 1 - State Road Corridor
Due to the presence of the State Road Bridge, this corridor presents an
opportunity to establish a crossing without the need for a new structure. Several
variations of this alternative were evaluated:
•
•
•
•
1A uses the existing 5-foot wide sidewalk on the north side of the bridge
to accommodate the ECG
1B adds a new shared-use path to the south side of the structure
1C replaces the bridge entirely with a new structure that accommodates
the ECG
1D constructs a new pedestrian bridge adjacent to the south side of the
existing bridge.
•
3A begins at the Jack’s Marina dock, crosses perpendicular to the main
channel, and uses a boardwalk structure to span wetland areas and
connect with the inner trail
3B originates from the same area as 3A, but crosses the creek at an angle
and connects with the NSP outer trail at an elevated berm south of the
wetlands
3C has the same landing point in NSP as 3B, but crosses perpendicular
to the main channel and lands south of Jack’s Marina near the privately
operated NSP marina
Alternative 4 - Basin Area (NSP)
The final bridge corridor crosses the creek near the confluence of the Neshaminy
Creek and the Delaware River. On the Bristol side, the trail would extend from
River Road similar to Alternative 3, but would then continue south through a
wooded area adjacent to West Basin Drive. After crossing the creek on a new
pedestrian bridge, the trail would connect to the existing NSP trail system.
Alternative 2 - Jack’s Marina / North (NSP)
This alternative crosses the Neshaminy Creek on a new pedestrian bridge at the
north end of Jack’s Marina. Within NSP, the bridge would cross the “sand dunes”
area and then tie into Logan Walk. The landing on the Bristol side would be
incorporated into Jack’s Marina near 6th Avenue.
Alternative 3 - Jack’s Marina / South (NSP)
This alternative crosses the creek on a new structure at the south end of Jack’s
Marina. Approaching the creek from River Road in Croydon, the trail would run
along the southern edge of the Jack’s Marina property. The bridge crossing
would be established in the vicinity of an existing wood dock and would connect
to the existing NSP trail system on the Bensalem side. Due to varying topography
14
December 2013
Figure 5: Bridge Crossing Alternatives
1st
ve
ily A
Em
ve
dA
ing
Ave
Ave
ve
hA
4t
ylan
m
Wyo
Ave
2nd
ve
hA
ve
hA
6t
Mar
n
ow
Br
Bensalem
Township
Ave
isty
Chr
Ave
ve
ar A
Ced 2011)
(SR
3rd
ve
kA
Yor
New
5t
95
2)
200
(SR
d
a
o
te R
Sta
Phragmites
Dominated
ve
aA
r
Ros
e
Av
sD
e
Av
s Ln
r Rd
Ave
ent
nm
Alig
G
d EC
ose
Ave
#
Potential Alternatives
Bridge Segment
Approach Segment
al Dr
Centr
Trail Segment
s
E. Ba
3a
Former
Soil
Factory
Potential ECG Connection
nk
in Dr
Du
as
W. B
3c
in Dr
3b
e
Av
e
Av
Fir
Neshaminy
State Park
g
Lo
t
en
nm
g
i
Al
p
Pro
Rive
East Coast Greenway (ECG)
h
Pat
vel
Rd
Gra
rr y
lk
Wa
Ave
Ave
sfe
Elm
an
2nd
3rd
4th
h
t
Pa
nk
Neshaminy Creek
el
av
Gr
Jack’s
Marina
1st
e
e Av
war
Dela
Sand
Dunes
2)
00
2
(SR
Du
Pro
sa
2
ad
Ro
e
t
a
St
G
EC
sed
o
p
Ro
all
k
Win
M
sh
ar
ve
ler A
Mil
e
r Av
ve
ler A
Mil
Ln
Ave
e
r Av
Ave
Ave
2009)
a
Ced
5th
-d
1a
ler
Mil
elsio
Exc
Bristol
Township
6th
(SR
Haunted Ln
s
re
og
Pr
sfe
rr y
Rd
4
D
iver
re R
a
w
ela
Unpaved Trail
Former Dredge
Disposal Area
Bucks County, PA
December 2013
Sources:
North
December 2013
15
Evaluation of Alternatives
Each alternative was developed in a sufficient level of detail to determine
potential impacts and costs. An overall alignment, span arrangement, pier
layout, bottom of beam elevation, and landing/approach configuration was
determined for each bridge alternative. The following factors were considered in
the evaluation:
Environmental/Ecological Impacts
Given the extent of natural resources within NSP, it was difficult to
completely avoid impacts to sensitive environmental and ecological
resources. The bridge feasibility analysis and ecological inventory were
closely integrated to minimize potential impacts resources such as:
•
•
•
Construction & Maintenance Costs
Order-of-magnitude construction cost estimates were developed based on
the conceptual bridge designs. Future bridge maintenance costs such as
repainting, deck joint repair, and scour repair were also an important factor
in assessing the alternatives.
Wetlands – both direct and indirect (shading) impacts to tidal and
forested wetlands
Habitat – intrusion on potential habitat for unique plant and animal
species
Mature Woodland Impacts – removal of mature woodland areas
including Coastal Plain and Silverwood Maple forests
Constructability Issues
Construction access routes, construction equipment laydown/staging
areas, and pier construction within the creek were key considerations in the
evaluation, especially related to potential impacts to habitat, wetlands, and
other environmentally-sensitive features.
Property Impacts
Potential impacts to private property were evaluated and avoided where
possible.
Floodplain Effects
Any new structure along the Neshaminy Creek has the potential to impact
the 100-year FEMA floodplain. Stream gauge and FEMA flood study data
were used to determine critical water surface elevations, which influenced
bridge design parameters including span lengths and bottom of beam
elevations.
16
Boat Navigation
Boat navigation clearances along the Neshaminy Creek were an important
consideration due to the need to accommodate both existing and future
marine activity. Early coordination with the United States Coast Guard
established the governing horizontal and vertical bridge clearances, which
influenced bridge design parameters including span lengths, pier locations,
and bottom of beam elevations.
December 2013
User Experience
The anticipated experience of future trail users also factored into the
evaluation. Separating ECG facilities from roadway traffic and providing a
scenic route was generally regarded as more important than providing a
direct route.
A screening matrix (included in Appendix C) was developed to evaluate and
compare the alternatives. Based on technical analysis and input from the
Steering Committee, several alternatives were dropped from consideration for
the following reasons:
•
Selection of Preferred Alternative
Alternative 1B: Preliminary structural analysis of the State Road Bridge
indicated that major superstructure rehabilitation would be needed to
support a new or expanded sidewalk area. Stakeholders agreed that
the anticipated cost and timeframe of bridge rehabilitation exceeds the
project expectations.
•
Alternative 1C: Conversations with PennDOT indicated that the State
Road Bridge is not structurally deficient and there are no plans to replace
the bridge in the near future. Stakeholders agreed that the anticipated
cost and timeframe of a full bridge replacement exceeds the project
expectations.
•
Alternative 2: This alignment would negatively impact habitat in the
sensitive “sand dunes” area, which was unacceptable to DCNR.
•
Alternative 4: This alignment would negatively impact nearly ½ acre of
mature woodland areas, which was unacceptable to DCNR.
The remaining alternatives (1A & 1D) were presented to the Steering Committee
for a final evaluation. The Steering Committee decided to move forward with the
existing sidewalk option (1A) as the preferred crossing alternative. By utilizing
the existing State Road Bridge and not requiring a new or rehabilitated crossing,
this alternative minimizes both costs and environmental impacts. The new
pedestrian bridge alternative (1D) was not selected because of its high cost and
impact to private property on the south side of State Road in Croydon.
While Alternative 1A is anticipated to intrude on existing wetlands, CRA’s
ecological assessment has identified sufficient opportunities within NSP to
provide mitigation for the wetland impacts (discussed in more detail in Section
6).
Conceptual layouts and impact assessments for the remaining alternatives (1A,
1D, 3A, 3B, 3C) were developed in more detail (concept plans are included in
Appendix B). A stakeholder meeting was then held with PRPA to determine
the feasibility of Alternatives 3A-C (minutes are included in Appendix A). At
this meeting, PRPA indicated they will be using the entire Jack’s Marina site for
wetland mitigation and there is no room for a trail along the southern edge
of their property. Without access to the Jack’s Marina site, the alignments for
Alternatives 3A-C would need to be located on NSP property. These alignments
would all impact designated DCNR Natural Areas, which was not acceptable to
DCNR.
December 2013
17
5 - East Coast Greenway Trail Connections
With the State Road Bridge selected as the preferred location for the East Coast
Greenway (ECG) to cross the Neshaminy Creek, the next step was to determine
how to connect the bridge to planned ECG alignments. From the southwest
direction (Philadelphia), the proposed ECG route – the Bensalem Greenway –
would run along State Road and terminate at the entrance to Neshaminy State
Park (NSP) at Dunksferry Road. From the northeast direction (Bristol Borough),
the proposed ECG route is planned to approach the study area via River Road.
Multiple trail alignments connecting these points to the State Road Bridge
crossing were evaluated and are discussed below (a map showing potential ECG
alternatives for the State Road Corridor is included in Appendix C).
Trail Alignments – Bensalem Township
Two ECG alignments were considered on the Bensalem side of the creek: one
running along State Road and the other through NSP. A key difference between
these alignments is how the ECG transitions from the existing bridge sidewalk
on the north side of the road to the Bensalem Greenway on the south side of
the road. For the NSP alignment, a new traffic signal would be needed at the
Haunted Lane/State Road intersection to allow trail users to cross State Road and
enter directly into NSP. In contrast, the State Road alignment takes advantage
of the existing Winks Lane traffic signal to accommodate pedestrian crossings.
However, this alignment would have ROW and grading impacts to the residential
property at the northwest corner of the Haunted Lane intersection and would
also impact five (5) residential properties near the Winks Lane intersection. It is
also important to note that one of the main goals of this project is to provide
access to NSP; from that perspective, a State Road alignment is not as desirable as
an alignment through the park.
Cedar Avenue alignment would take advantage of the existing traffic signal at
Cedar Avenue. The stretch of State Road between 4th Avenue and Cedar Avenue
contains numerous businesses with open driveways and head-in parking directly
adjacent to the shoulder, all of which present potential conflict points between
vehicles and ECG users. To eliminate or minimize these conflicts, the Cedar
Avenue alignment would require access and parking modifications to at least five
(5) business frontages along State Road.
Proposed East Coast Greenway (ECG) Alignment
The Study Team met with both Townships to discuss the alignments described
above (meeting minutes are included in Appendix A). Based on these meetings
and Steering Committee input, a preferred trail alignment was selected. On the
Bensalem side, the NSP alignment was selected as the preferred option because
it brings the path immediately into NSP and avoids frontage impacts along
the north side of State Road. The 4th Avenue alignment was selected as the
preferred option on the Bristol side because it minimizes frontage and parking
conflicts along the north side of State Road.
Figure 6 shows the proposed East Coast Greenway alignment between
Dunksferry Road and River Road. The full alignment was split into three segments
(A, B & C) to differentiate sections of the trail and aid in the development of cost
estimates. These segments are described on the following pages.
Trail Alignments – Bristol Township
Two ECG alignments were considered on the Bristol side of the creek, with both
running along the north side of State Road. The main difference between these
alignments is whether 4th Avenue or Cedar Avenue is used to connect to River
Road. An improved pedestrian crossing would be necessary at the 4th Avenue/
State Road intersection to accommodate the 4th Avenue alignment, while the
18
December 2013
Figure 6: Proposed East Coast Greenway (ECG) Alignment
Use Existing
Sidewalk
Wink
s
Haunted Lane
Lane
Dunksferry Rd
Bensalem
New Signal
Segment B
State Road (SR 2002)
Connects with Bensalem Greenway
B
Segment A
A
W pp
et ro
la x
nd im
Li ate
m
its
Neshaminy Cree
k
A
Logan Walk
Bristol
venu
4th A
N
n Ave
Use Existing
Sidewalk
B
Segment C
Cedar Avenue
6th Avenue
e
Brow
A
W pp
et ro
la x
nd im
Li ate
m
its
Improved
Crossing
Bucks County, PA
December, 2013
Continues Through To River Road
December 2013
2nd Avenue
3rd Avenue
5th Avenue
ek
y Cre
amin
Nesh
6th Avenue
C
1st Avenue
nt B
e
Segm
Mapping Sources:
Wetland Boundaries: CRA, 2013
Parcel Lines: BCPC, 2013
19
Segment A:
Dunksferry Road to Haunted Lane (Figure 8)
Figure 7: Dunksferry Road Sections
The proposed ECG route begins at the intersection of Dunksferry Road and State
Road, which is the terminus of the proposed Bensalem Greenway. As shown in
Figure 7, a new section of paved trail would run adjacent to Dunksferry Road on
NSP property until it reaches Logan Walk. At that point, the trail would connect
with Logan Walk and run parallel to State Road through the park. Logan Walk
would remain in its existing configuration as a paved multi-use trail, except
additional signage indicating the ECG route would be installed. At the eastern
end of Logan Walk, a new section of paved trail would be added to extend the
trail out to Haunted Lane. The ECG would then cross to the north side of State
Road at Haunted Lane.
NSP
Based on an AADT of 13,000 vehicles and a posted speed limit of 40 mph on this
section of State Road, a full or pedestrian-activated traffic signal is recommended
at the Haunted Lane intersection to accommodate bicycle/pedestrian crossings
for the proposed ECG alignment. An added benefit of a signal at this location
would be to accommodate the planned Neshaminy Creek trail alignment,
which was proposed to cross State Road at Haunted Lane in the 2008 Bensalem
Township Greenway Trail Feasibility Study. The new traffic signal may also help
facilitate turning movements from trucks, which currently need to use both lanes
and some of the shoulder to make turns on to State Road. Initial conversations
with Bensalem Township officials indicate the Township would support a signal
at this location.
EXISTING
ECG
NSP
PROPOSED
20
December 2013
Figure 8: Alignment for Segment A
Bucks County, PA
December, 2013
Wink
s
Haunted Lane
Lane
Dunksferry Rd
N
Connects with Bensalem Greenway
New Traffic
Signal
New Trail Section
New Trail Section
Logan Walk (Existing)
2)
R200
State
Logan Walk near Dunksferry Road
(S
Road
State Road / Haunted Lane Intersection
December 2013
21
Segment B:
Haunted Lane through the State Road Bridge (Figure 9)
From the Haunted Lane intersection, a new 8 to 10-foot wide sidepath would
approach the State Road Bridge on the north side of the road. Since there
currently isn’t enough space between the roadway’s edge and the top of slope
for a trail, this study proposes to widen the embankment to the north of State
Road to provide room for the sidepath. While approximately 15-20 feet of
widening would be needed, using a 1:1 slope would keep the proposed toe of
slope within a few feet of the existing toe of slope (thus minimizing wetland
impacts). The sidepath would connect directly to the existing bridge sidewalk.
A boardwalk option was also investigated for this segment as a potential way
to minimize wetland impacts. However, it was found that construction of the
boardwalk would have similar if not greater impacts due to a lack of suitable
foundation material and the need for equipment access during construction of
the piers. Also, with an estimated cost of nearly $2 million, the boardwalk option
was significantly more expensive than the embankment option.
State Road Bridge Sidewalk
22
Bensalem Approach
December 2013
Bristol Approach
Figure 9: Alignment for Segment B
Haunted Lane
N
Use Existing
Sidewalk
Widen Embankment
to Provide Sidepath
New Traffic
Signal
Neshaminy Cre
ek
e y
at ar
im nd
ox ou
pr B
Ap and
l
et
W
Bucks County, PA
December 2013
December, 2013
23
Segment C:
State Road Bridge to River Road (Figure 11)
Figure 10: State Road Sections
After crossing the existing State Road Bridge, the ECG would extend into Bristol
via a new 8 to 10-foot wide sidepath along the north side of State Road. Located
primarily within the PennDOT right-of-way, the sidepath would continue along
the north side of State Road until reaching 4th Avenue. This section along State
Road presents several feasibility issues that will need to be evaluated during
engineering design, including:
Utility/ROW Impacts
Utility poles are currently located on the north side of State Road within the
sidepath corridor. Similar to what is being considered for portions of the
Bensalem Greenway, it may be possible to shift the centerline of State Road
to the south. As shown in Figure 10, this would provide more space for the
trail within public right-of-way and may also avoid utility impacts.
SB
Curbs/Drainage
Curbs are currently not present along this section of State Road. New curb is
recommended along the north side to provide vertical separation between
the proposed sidepath and vehicular traffic. The impact of curbs on roadway
drainage is an issue that will need to be evaluated during engineering
design.
NB
EXISTING
ECG
SB
NB
New Curb
PROPOSED
24
December 2013
Figure 11: Alignment for Segment C
6th Avenue
e
venu
4th A
Brow
n Ave
Improved
Crossing
New Sidepath on
State Road
3rd Avenue
5th Avenue
6th Avenue
ek
y Cre
amin
Nesh
Approximate
Wetland Boundary
Use Existing
Sidewalk
Shared Roadway on
4th Avenue
N
Bucks County, PA
December, 2013
Connects to River Road
December 2013
25
Figure 12: 4th Avenue Sections
At the intersection with 4th Avenue, the ECG alignment would cross to the
south side of State Road and proceed south on 4th Avenue. Based on an AADT
of 12,000 vehicles and a posted speed limit of 35 mph on this section of State
Road, an improved crossing is recommended at the 4th Avenue intersection
to accommodate bicycle/pedestrian crossings for the ECG. While the exact
treatment would be determined during preliminary engineering, potential
options include a marked crosswalk combined with an overhead flashing
beacon, a marked crosswalk with RRFB’s (rectangular rapid flashing beacons), or
a pedestrian-actuated traffic signal. Initial conversations with Bristol Township
officials indicate the Township would support an improved crossing at this
location.
EXISTING
The proposed ECG route uses 4th Avenue to access River Road and eventually
link to future ECG sections. Fourth Avenue is a low-speed, low-volume
neighborhood street with parking allowed on both sides. Based on these
conditions, the recommended treatment is a “share-the-road” condition where
bicyclists and pedestrians share the road with vehicular traffic (see Figure
12). This configuration would establish a designated ECG route while avoiding
impacts to property frontages and residential on-street parking.
At the public meeting, some residents of 4th Avenue expressed concern over
this route due to the potential for conflicts between vehicles and cyclists. Shared
road segments have been included in other sections of the ECG system and
would be consistent with the future ECG treatment on River Road. Signage and
pavement markings are recommended and will be important to designate and
reinforce the “share-the-road” condition.
PROPOSED
26
December 2013
Conceptual Cost Estimates
An order-of-magnitude cost estimate was developed for each segment of
the proposed ECG trail alignment. The estimate includes all construction
and materials costs, engineering/professional design costs, construction
management/inspection costs, and a 20% contingency; however, it does not
include costs associated with environmental mitigation. A summary of the
estimate is provided below, while the full estimate is included in Appendix E.
Cost Item
State Road in Croydon, Looking West
Cost
Segment A
$131,000
Segment B
$462,000
Segment C
$301,000
General Items
Construction Total
$75,000
$969,000
Engineering Design @ 15%
$145,000
CM/CI @ 15%
$145,000
Contingency @ 20%
$194,000
Project Total
$1,453,000
4th Avenue in Croydon, Looking towards State Road
December 2013
27
6 - Ecological Enhancement Concepts
In addition to evaluating potential East Coast Greenway (ECG) crossing locations
and alignments, the Steering Committee and Study Team desired to investigate
potential ecological restoration improvements within Neshaminy State Park
(NSP). These improvements could provide a number of benefits including:
wetland mitigation; habitat enhancement; enhanced user experience for park
visitors; and environmental education via interpretive signage.
Based on site visits and discussions with the Steering Committee, Conestoga–
Rovers & Associates (CRA) developed ecological enhancement concept plans
for four key areas within NSP. These areas are designated on Figure 13 as Areas
1 through 4. An existing site plan, proposed concept plan, and detailed cost
estimate for each ecological enhancement area is provided in Appendix D. Each
area is described in more detail on the following pages.
In addition to enhancing the ecological attributes of the park, some of these
areas can also serve as mitigation for potential impacts to natural resources
from the East Coast Greenway (ECG) trail alignment. Based on a 1:1 slope, it is
estimated that widening the embankment to accommodate a trail alignment
along the north side of State Road could impact up to 0.20 acres of adjacent
tidal wetlands at the toe of the slope. As summarized in the table below, the
wetland creation (Area 1) and vernal pool (Area 2) enhancements would provide
ample mitigation opportunities for the trail. Under current PADEP and USACOE
mitigation requirements, implementation of these projects would likely satisfy
the permitting requirements of these agencies.
The four concept plans were developed so that each project could be
implemented either independently or in combination with the other projects.
This approach to the restoration work provides additional flexibility in seeking
and obtaining future project funding. For each project, further engineering will
be necessary, including the preparation of construction grading and erosion
and sedimentation control plans, detailed planting plans, and a monitoring and
adaptive management plan. The monitoring and adaptive management plan
must address the issue of how invasive species will be managed and will be a
requirement for the final design and permit application package for each area.
Description
Mitigation
Opportunity
Estimated
Cost *
Area 1
Wetland Creation
0.94 acres
$83,000
Area 2
Vernal Pool Creation
0.89 acres
$50,900
Area 3
Reforestation
NA
$42,900
Area 4
Erosion Control
NA
$34,600
* Cost estimates include construction and maintenance costs, but do not include costs associated with
final design, environmental testing (if warranted), permitting, and permitting fees. Additionally, estimates
assume that all excavated soil/dredged spoils would be managed onsite rather than shipped off site.
Tidal Wetlands along the Neshaminy Creek
28
December 2013
Figure 13: Ecological Enhancement Keymap
1st
ve
ily A
Em
ve
dA
ing
Ave
Ave
ve
hA
4t
ylan
m
Wyo
Ave
2nd
ve
hA
ve
hA
6t
Mar
n
ow
Br
Bensalem
Township
Ave
isty
Chr
Ave
ve
ar A
Ced 2011)
(SR
3rd
ve
kA
Yor
New
5t
95
2)
200
(SR
d
a
o
te R
Sta
Phragmites
Dominated
ve
aA
r
Ros
e
Av
sD
Ro
e
r Av
sa
e
Av
all
ve
ler A
Mil
Rive
r Rd
s Ln
k
Win
M
sh
ar
Ave
e
r Av
Ave
a
Ced
5th
Ave
2009)
ve
ler A
Mil
Ln
ler
Mil
elsio
Exc
Bristol
Township
6th
(SR
Haunted Ln
s
re
og
Pr
1st
Ave
Ave
Ave
Ave
Jack’s
Marina
2nd
3rd
4th
h
t
Pa
Du
nk
sfe
e
Av
e
Av
Fir
Elm
alk
nW
a
g
Lo
Habitat Characteristics
Tidal Flat/Wetlands
Riparian Woodland
Coastal Plain Woodland
Herbaceous Meadow
h
Pat
vel
Rd
Gra
rr y
Neshaminy Creek
el
av
Gr
ad
Ro
e
t
a
St
e
e Av
war
Dela
Sand
Dunes
2)
00
2
(SR
Sand Dunes
Neshaminy
State Park
Black Locust
al Dr
Centr
A1
s
E. Ba
in Dr
Former
Soil
Factory
Neshaminy
State Park
as
W. B
in Dr
Du
nk
A3
A4
sfe
rr y
Rd
A2
D
iver
re R
a
w
ela
Unpaved Trail
Former Dredge
Disposal Area
Bucks County, PA
December 2013
Sources:
North
December 2013
29
Area 1 - Wetland Creation
This enhancement involves the creation of a 0.94-acre tidal wetland area between the inner trail and the west bank of Neshaminy Creek. As shown in
Figure 14, an existing upland area would be excavated approximately 10 feet to connect this area to the tidal influence of the Neshaminy Creek and
the adjoining tidal forested wetland. The area to be excavated is currently a low-value mowed area used by the park to dispose or store Ailanthus and
Paulownia trees that have been cut down. The excavated area would be planted with native herbaceous species and shrubs to create a tidal wetland.
The existing trail would be routed around the new wetland area and a bench and interpretive signage would be added to create a place where park
users could rest and view the wetlands. As an independent project, DCNR will be replacing a culvert at the east end of the existing wetland area in an
effort to increase tidal inflow from the Neshaminy Creek into the wetland. The culvert modification has been considered in the design of the proposed
tidal wetland and will enhance tidal exchange in both the created wetland and the existing wetland. The entire wetland area would be monitored and
managed for a minimum of 5 years from the date of construction to prevent the colonization by invasive species.
Existing Wetland Area
30
Adjacent Upland Area
December 2013
Figure 14: Area 1 Concept Plan
INY
HAM
NES
EEK
CR
TIDAL WATERLINE
10
8
12
FLOODWAY (FEMA)
6
0
16
14
4
4
20
2
PLANT WETLAND SEED
MIX AND SHRUBS BELOW
6 FOOT ELEVATION
(0.47 ACRES)
APPROXIMATE
EXISTING
WETLAND
6
18
004
4
2
4
4
EXISTING 24” DIA. RCP
CULVERT
RE-ROUTE TRAIL
AS REQUIRED
EXISTING TRAIL
ALIGNMENT
6
10
16
20
8
12
3
004
CONSTRUCT REST AREA
WITH BENCH AND
INTERPRETIVE SIGNAGE
ABOUT WETLAND
PLANT TREES / SHRUBS
ABOVE 6 FOOT ELEVATION
(0.47 ACRES)
14
2
004
4
6
NOTE: WETLAND CREATION AREA TO BE MONITORED
AND MANAGED FOR A MINIMUM OF 5 YEARS FROM THE
DATE OF CONSTRUCTION TO PREVENT COLONIZATION
BY INVASIVE SPECIES
8
10
WETLAND CREATION AREA
REGRADE WITH 4:1 SLOPE TO
CONNECT NEW WETLAND
WITH EXISTING, TIDALLY
INFLUENCED WETLAND
(0.94 ACRES)
12
8
EXISTING TRAIL
ALIGNMENT
6
14
APPROXIMATE
EXISTING
WETLAND
Bucks County, PA
December, 2013
LEGEND
10
4
EXISTING CONTOUR
PROPOSED CONTOUR
FLOOD PLAIN LINE
MAPPING SOURCES:
EXISTING CONTOURS: PAMAP, 2008
WETLAND BOUNDARIES: CRA, 2013
14
December 2013
NOTE: THIS DRAWING HAS BEEN PREPARED FOR THE PENNSYLVANIA
4ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL IN SUPPORT OF A CONCEPTUAL ECOLOGICAL
ENHANCEMENT PLAN FOR THE PARCEL SHOWN. THE USE OF THIS MAP FOR
ANY OTHER PURPOSE IS AT THE USERS SOLE RISK AND LIABILITY. THIS MAP
SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR NAVIGATION PURPOSES.
31
Area 2 - Vernal Pool Creation
This enhancement involves the creation of a 0.89-acre vernal pool area within a former dredge disposal area at the south end of the park. As shown in
Figure 15, an existing low value upland area dominated by young black locust trees would be excavated approximately 8 feet to create a complex of
three vernal pools with adjoining wetland and transitional upland habitats. The vernal pool areas would be planted with native trees and shrubs, and
it is anticipated they would provide significant amphibian breeding habitat for a variety of native and rare coastal plain species. These areas would be
monitored and managed for a minimum of 5 years from the date of construction to prevent colonization by invasive species. Park users would have the
opportunity to observe these vernal pool habitats via access from the inner trail.
Vernal Pool Creation Area - Existing Conditions
32
December 2013
14
6
20
PLANT WETLAND SEED MIX
BELOW 6 FOOT ELEVATION
(0.40 ACRES)
2
004
18
8
20
(0.49 ACRES)
18
2
004
12
VERNAL POOL CREATION AREA
CREATE SEVERAL VERNAL POOLS
WITH VARYING ELEVATIONS
(0.89 ACRES)
8
6
NOTE: VERNAL POOL CREATION AREA TO BE
MONITORED AND MANAGED FOR A MINIMUM OF 5
YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CONSTRUCTION TO
PREVENT COLONIZATION BY INVASIVE SPECIES
12
16
14
4
4
2
8
10
8
8
2
4
6
8
EXISTING TRAIL
ALIGNMENT
6
14
2
0
10
4
18
6
4
FLOODWAY (FEMA)
8
6
TIDAL WATERLINE
10
NESHAMINY
APPROXIMATE
EXISTING
WETLAND
14
CREEK
2
12
4
16
4
4
EXISTING TRAIL
ALIGNMENT
F
Bucks County, PA
December, 2013
LEGEND
10
4
DELAWARE RIVER
(TIDAL)
EXISTING CONTOUR
EBB
PROPOSED CONTOUR
FLOOD PLAIN LINE
December 2013
D
LOO
MAPPING SOURCES:
ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL IN SUPPORT OF A CONCEPTUAL ECOLOGICAL
33
Area 3 - Reforestation in Former Soil Factory Area
This enhancement involves restoration of a 4-acre coastal plain plant community in the former “soil factory” area. As shown in Figure 16, the existing
lower value herbaceous meadow would be converted to coastal plain forest and meadow by preparing the area and then planting a variety of native
herbaceous, shrub, and tree species. The resulting area would be populated by a variety of wildlife species that use riparian corridors and their adjoining
habitats. An interpretive trail loop would be constructed through the new forest so that park users could enjoy these habitats.
Note that other portions of the “soil factory” provide suitable areas where restoring coastal plain meadow and woodland habitat would provide significant
benefits. The exact layout of the Area 3 ecological enhancements should be verified with PADCNR prior to initiating final design.
Existing Herbaceous Meadow in Former Soil Factory Area
34
December 2013
14
MAPPING SOURCES:
20
20
18
16
12
2
004
NOTE: REFORESTATION AREA TO BE MONITORED AND
MANAGED FOR A MINIMUM OF 5 YEARS FROM THE DATE
OF CONSTRUCTION TO PREVENT COLONIZATION BY
INVASIVE SPECIES
REFOREST AREA
(3.14 ACRES)
NOTE: OTHER PORTIONS OF THE “SOIL FACTORY”
PROVIDE SUITABLE AREAS WHERE RESTORING COASTAL
PLAIN MEADOW AND WOODLAND HABITAT WOULD
PROVIDE SIGNIFICANT BENEFITS. THE EXACT LAYOUT
OF THESE ECOLOGICAL ENHANCEMENTS SHOULD BE
VERIFIED WITH PADCNR PRIOR TO FINAL DESIGN.
PROPOSED TRAIL
20
22
10
16
RESTORATION OF COASTAL
PLAIN FOREST AND UPLAND
MEADOW COMMUNITIES
(4.06 ACRES)
EXISTING TRAIL
ALIGNMENT
14
6
0
20
2
8
20
18
18
INSTALL INTERPRETIVE
SIGNAGE ABOUT
MEADOW AND NATIVE
FOREST RESTORATION
14
12
16
4
12
8
10
8
2
12
004
18
SELECTIVELY
WITH HERBICIDE.
SPRAY
ENTIRETREAT
AREA AREA
WITH HERBICIDE
TO
ONCE AREA
BEEN TREATED,
PLANT SHOWY
REMOVE
ALLHAS
VEGETATION.
ONCE VEGETATION
IS
MEADOW MIX
(0.92SHOWY
ACRE) MEADOW SEED MIX.
REMOVED,
PLANT
(0.92 ACRES)
4
14
6
0
10
8
6
TIDAL WATERLINE
10
2
Bucks County, PA
December, 2013
FLOODWAY (FEMA)
FLO
LEGEND
10
4
CREEK
12
APPROXIMATE
EXISTING
WETLAND
NESHAMINY
EXISTING TRAIL
ALIGNMENT
14
4
16
4
4
OD
EXISTING CONTOUR
DELAWARE RIVER
(TIDAL)
PROPOSED CONTOUR
FLOOD PLAIN LINE
EBB
December 2013
35
Area 4 - Erosion Control along the Delaware River
This enhancement involves stabilization and restoration of approximately 150-feet of the Delaware River shoreline that is currently being protected from
erosion by concrete barriers. As shown in Figure 17, the barriers would be removed and a stone wave-break would be installed below the mean high
tide line. The shoreline would then be stabilized with a series of stone and vegetative bank re-enforcements to create a natural but stable bank. This
stabilization method would also create a variety of wetland and upland habitats for riparian wildlife. Contingent on funding, this treatment could be
extended to other downstream shoreline areas within the park as a way to prevent further erosion.
In the short term, the shoreline stabilization work would need to be keyed back into the bank at its upstream and downstream extent to prevent erosion
from adjacent, unprotected upstream properties. In future years, it may be beneficial to conduct outreach to adjacent property owners about extending
this treatment to upstream parcels.
Existing Erosion Along the Delaware River Shoreline
36
December 2013
WILLOW
PLANTINGS
EXTREME HIGH TIDES & STORMS
ELEVATION 10
ELEVATION 6
ROCK
RIPRAP
MEAN HIGH TIDE
ELEVATION 4
MEAN LOW TIDE
TREE/SHRUB
PLANTINGS
POROUS BLOCK
POROUS BLOCK
RIVER
IRREGULARLY FLOODED
UPLAND BUFFER
BANKFACE
ELEVATION -2
REGULARLY FLOODED
NATURAL INTERTIDAL WETLAND VEGETATION
SUBTITAL WATERS
CROSS SECTION
NOTE: SHORELINE TO BE MONITORED AND MANAGED FOR
A MINIMUM OF 5 YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CONSTRUCTION
TO PREVENT COLONIZATION BY INVASIVE SPECIES
Mp
Ca
Mp
Sn
Sn
Sn
Sn
TREE/SHRUB
PLANTINGS
Ca
Ca
Vd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Mp
Vd
Vd
Sd
Sd
Vd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Sd
WILLOW
PLANTINGS
Sd
ROCK
RIPRAP
RIVER
NOTE: UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM ENDS OF
TREATMENT MUST BE KEYED INTO EXISTING BANK
PLAN VIEW
Bucks County, PA
December, 2013
DETAIL
1
N.T.S.
002
SHORELINE EROSION CONTROL
December 2013
37
7 - Next Steps
Through this study, the Pennsylvania Environmental Council (PEC) has selected
a preferred crossing for the East Coast Greenway (ECG) to cross the Neshaminy
Creek and identified a proposed trail alignment connecting the crossing with
adjacent ECG segments. The study identified a number of alternative alignments,
evaluated the feasibility of these alternatives, and recommended a preferred trail
alignment. The process to bring this section of the ECG into active use includes
the following next steps:
•
•
•
Identify funding for Engineering Design and Construction
Initiate and complete Engineering Design
Initiate and complete Construction
Regular coordination with key stakeholders will be necessary in the development
of the Neshaminy Creek Crossing Project. In the immediate future, this includes
coordination with PennDOT District 6-0 and both Bensalem and Bristol Townships
regarding the potential for improved pedestrian crossings at the Haunted Lane
and 4th Avenue intersections with State Road (SR 2002). DCNR will also be a
key partner in developing the trail alignment through Neshaminy State Park. As
trail design moves forward, it will be important to continue engaging the local
community to share progress and gather additional feedback.
This study also recommends a series of ecological restoration concepts within
Neshaminy State Park to both enhance the park’s natural features and also act
as mitigation for the proposed ECG trail alignment. The candidate mitigation
projects that may be needed for permitting of the trail (including some or all of
Areas 1 and 2) typically must be completed at the time of project construction in
accordance with the issued permits. Any additional enhancements beyond the
mitigation requirements for the trail (including Areas 3 and 4) can be completed
on a discretionary basis by DCNR as funding is secured. Funding sources for
ecological enhancements may come from Federal, State, or private sources (for
example, mitigation for other private projects not related to the ECG project).
In collaboration with Steering Committee members, PEC will continue to explore
these funding sources with the ultimate goal of completing this regionallysignificant ECG project and enhancing and restoring Neshaminy State Park’s
important coastal resources.
Potential funding sources for trail implementation include a variety of Federal,
State, and Local programs. The Federal surface transportation authorization,
MAP-21, provides funding for trail projects through several initiatives, including
the Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) and Congestion Mitigation
& Air Quality Improvement (CMAQ) Program. Grants for trail design and
construction may also be available through State agencies such as PADCNR,
PADEP, and PennDOT. Other potential funding sources include local and regional
organizations such as non-profit agencies and charitable foundations.
38
December 2013
THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
December 2013
39
Appendix A - Meeting Materials
40
December 2013
Steering Committee Meeting #1 (February 14, 2013)
NeshaminyCreekCrossingProject
o
ProjectKickoffMeeting
UEdisplayedphotosofotherbridgesinparksettingsthatcouldbeusedasexamplesfor
thedesign.DCNRnotedseveralbridgesinPennsylvaniathatwouldalsobegood
examples.
February14,201310amͲ12pm
Present:
JoshSwartley&JeffJohns,DCNR
DavidJohnson,BucksCountyPlanningCommission

o
Discussionoftheneed/benefits/efficienciesofcoordinationwithLisaUrbanMagee
(PhiladelphiaRegionalPortAuthority)fortheJack’sMarinawetlandenhancementsite.

JeffKnowles&RebeccaKennedy,PEC
DCNRtoforwardavailablephotos,profiles,etc.ofthesebridgestoUE
PECwillcoordinatewithUEandDCNRtoarrangeameetingwithPRPAassoon
aspossible.
JohnFederico&DavidCox,UrbanEngineers
x
Ecologicalrestorationsiteopportunitieswerediscussed.
ScottBush,CRA
o
TheexistingdunesareaisbeingadequatelyaddressedbytheDCNR;noneedforfurther
workthere.
o
CRAwillexaminethe“soilfactory”sitefordiversityenhancement,invasiveplant
removalpotential,andthepossibilitiesofthecreationofvernalpoolsinandaround
thatarea.PECemphasizedthatanyrecommendationsshouldbe“fundable.”
o
CRAwillbepreparedtocreateaplantingplanfortheerodedriverfrontarea,butitwas
agreedthaterosionscontrolplanfortheareawilllikelyneeda“hardengineered”toeto
protectfromwave/wakeenergy,soUEwilltaketheleadondevelopingthatinitialplan.
o
Specificinvasiveplantremovalplansmaybeofinterestinseveralareas;CRAwillmake
somerecommendationsafterdoingamoreextensivefieldvisit.
o
DCNRnotedthatthisprojectmaypresentanopportunitytoincorporatedrainage
improvementsalongtheexistinggraveltrail,aswaterpondsinseveralareas
MeetingSummary:
x
Reviewedprojecttimelineformeetings;everyonepresentagreedwiththetimelineas
presentedbyUE(seeattached).
x
Reviewedexisting&historicalprojectmaps,aerialphotos,andsitesofinterestforboth
ecologicalrestorationandbridgelocation.
o
o
Concernswereraisedaboutanystructural/passagerequirementsthatmightbemade
bytheCoastGuard.UEwillcontacttheCoastGuardassoonaspossibletoestablish
desirednavigationalclearancesinthisarea.
Discussionofproposedbridgecrossingsandtheopportunities,issues,&concernsabout
eachoneoffourpotentialsites:parallelto/attachedtotheexistingbridge;just
downstreamfromthebridge;attheJack’sMarinapiersite;&nearthemouthofthe
NeshaminyCreek.
x

o
o
Highqualitywetlands&highvaluehabitatsexistatthesitedownstreamfrom
thebridge.
SiteTour
o
ThegroupparkedbythebermthatleadstothecrossingsiteacrossfromtheJack’s
Marinapier;twopossible“landings”forabridgewerediscussed,andpotential
opportunitiesandchallengesnoted.
o
Onthewalkback,variousecologicaldiversityprojectswerediscussed,includingwetland
enhancementsandinvasiveplantremoval.
o
PECrequestedthat,totheextentpossible,thattheprojectsbeexaminedin“pieces”to
allowforeventualincrementaldesignandfundingofprojects.
Therearesecurityissuesrelatedtoboatsandthepersonwhorunsthe
Neshaminyboatyardforthepotentialcrossingnearthestreammouth.
DecidedtorespondtoDCNRconcernsaboutpotentialwetland&securityimpactsby
focusingbridgefeasibilityanalysison1)analignmentthatparallelsorisattachedtothe
existingStateRoadBridge;2)analignmentthatrunsfromexistingJack’sMarinapier
sitetotheexistingtrail.
PECdiscussedthevalueofadecisionmatrixchartlistingthecosts,benefits,andimpacts
ofeachalternativeforthesteeringcommittee’suseintheevaluationprocess.
Themeetingendedat12:20pm.
December 2013
41
Stakeholder Meeting with Philadelphia Regional Port Authority (April 23, 2013)
o The proposed fishing pier has been removed from the location shown on the
concept plan. She noted that a fishing platform is now located slightly to the
south.
MEMORANDUM OF MEETING
These changes were based on additional input from the resource agencies. Lisa offered
to forward an updated concept plan to Urban.
Project:
Bucks County, PA
Subject:
Coordination Meeting w/ PRPA
Location:
Philadelphia Regional Port Authority (PRPA)
3460 North Delaware Avenue
Philadelphia PA, 19134
Date/Time:
10:00 AM / April 23, 2013
Once a design/build team has been selected, one of their first actions will be to meet with
the resource agencies to finalize the various components of the mitigation plan.
x
At this time, DCNR may have the opportunity to acquire the mitigation site after the
mitigation criteria have been achieved and the project is accepted by the resource
agencies. Exact details of that potential acquisition have yet to be developed.
It is believed that the enclosed represents an accurate description of the major events that
transpired at this meeting. Your notification of any errors or omissions is essential, as the
foregoing is intended to be part of the record, and is the basis upon which we will proceed.
Attended by:
Lisa Magee
Jim DiVergilis
Rebecca Kennedy
Josh Swartley
John Federico
Dave Cox
x
PRPA
PRPA
PEC
DCNR
Urban Engineers
Urban Engineers
lmagee@philaport.com
Respectfully submitted,
jdivergilis@philaport.com
rkennedy@pecpa.org
URBAN ENGINEERS, INC.
jswartley@pa.gov
jefederico@urbanengineers.com
decox@urbanengineers.com
______
John Federico, PE, PP, AICP
A coordination meeting for the Neshaminy Creek Crossing project was held on Tuesday, April
23rd, 2013 at PRPA’s office. John Federico presented an overview of the project schedule,
scope, and preliminary alternatives analyis. Lisa Magee then provided an update on PRPA’s
current plans for the Jack’s Marina site.
A summary of the major discussion items is listed below:
x
Lisa confirmed that PRPA has obtained the necessary permits to use the Jack’s Marina
site as mitigation for the Southport project in Philadelphia.
x
PRPA issued an RFP for a design/build contractor for the Jack’s Marina site in February
2013 and will be selecting a team very soon. Lisa anticipates a Notice to Proceed by the
end of May or beginning of June. PRPA would like to begin early action construction
items related to earthmoving this year; however, Lisa noted that any construction would
need to terminate prior to bog turtle season, which begins on October 15th. The overall
construction period is expected to extend through 2014.
x
Lisa described several key changes to PRPA’s concept plan for the Jack’s Marina site
that differ from the version PEC is currently using:
o The proposed trail around the perimeter of the site, as shown on the concept plan,
has been removed to maximize the area dedicated to mitigation.
Meeting Minutes – April 23, 2013
42
1
Meeting Minutes – April 23, 2013
December 2013
2
Steering Committee Meeting #2 (June 5, 2013)
o
From PEC’s perspective, a primary goal of this section of the ECG is to bring people into
Neshaminy State Park; therefore, an alignment on State Road between Haunted Lane
and Dunksferry Road is not as desirable as through the park.
o
Alt. 1a-1 was the preferred option on the Bensalem side because it brings the path
immediately into NSP and avoids frontage impacts along the north side of State Road.
An improved crossing would be needed at the Haunted Lane/State Road intersection to
accommodate this option. A signal may be justified based on safety concerns and/or
heavy truck operations. Action: UE will obtain crash data from PennDOT to determine
if there is a crash history. Also, UE/PEC will contact Bensalem Township to find out if a
signal has been considered in the past.
o
Andy Hamilton noted that only one official route gets designated for the East Coast
Greenway, although signage can be used to point out scenic diversions and other
connecting paths. Logan Walk and the gravel path that winds around the former soil
factory are the best options for the ECG route. Both options provide benefits, as the
gravel path provides access to scenic views while Logan Walk provides access to rest
area facilities. Andy Hamilton noted that the gravel path would need “top-dressing” (i.e.
adding approx. 1.5” of fines) to serve as the ECG route. Action: Jeff Johns will discuss
these options with DCNR’s Bureau Director and report back to the group.
o
Alt. 1a-3 was the preferred option on the Croydon side because it minimizes the
frontage and parking conflicts along the north side of State Road. This option would
designate 4th Avenue as a shared neighborhood street to access River Road and avoid
losing residential on-street parking. Andy Hamilton noted that sharrow segments have
been included in the ECG path system as a temporary condition. ECG’s guidelines on
the permanent use of sharrows may change in the near future. UE noted that it would
also be consistent with the future ECG treatment on River Road.
o
An improved crossing would be needed at the 4th Avenue/State Road intersection to
accommodate Alt. 1a-3. Action: UE will investigate the feasibility of this crossing,
along with potentially shifting lane striping to provide more room for the trail on the
north side of State Road between the bridge and 4th Avenue.
Steering Committee Meeting #2
June 5, 2013, 10:00 am -11:30 am
Present:
Jeff Knowles, PEC
John Federico & David Cox, Urban Engineers (UE)
Josh Swartley & Jeff Johns, DCNR
Rich Brahler, Bucks County Planning Commission
Andy Hamilton, East Coast Greenway
Meeting Summary:
x
UE reviewed major outcomes from an earlier meeting with PRPA. The key outcome is that PRPA
is using the entire site for wetland mitigation and does not support a trail on their site. Also
DCNR confirmed that PRPA will most likely retain ownership of the site after construction.
x
UE presented an overview of the crossing alternatives, including a screening matrix. A number
of alternatives (Alt 1b, 1c, 2, 3a, 3c, 4) were already dropped from consideration based on
consensus at the last meeting.
x
The group then discussed the State Road Corridor options (Alts. 1a & 1d) in detail. Major points
are summarized below:
o
Stakeholders preferred Alt 1a because it utilizes the existing State Road Bridge and does
not require a new crossing. The new pedestrian bridge (Alt 1d) wasn’t chosen because it
will be costly and the potential impacts are too great, especially the private property
impact on the north side of the bridge. Therefore, it was decided to move forward with
the existing sidewalk option (Alt 1a) for this corridor.
o
For the approaches along State Road, the group decided to move forward with the
embankment option instead of the boardwalk option due to lower cost and less
constructability issues. DCNR noted that the wetlands on the north side of State Road
are technically not included in DCNR’s “Natural Area” and the Bureau would support
trail improvements in this area. UE added that wetland impacts from the embankment
widening could potentially be mitigated by expanding an existing wetland near the soil
factory. Action: CRA will develop a mitigation strategy in more detail.
x
December 2013
The group also discussed the Jack’s Marina South options (Alts. 3a-c) in detail. Major points are
summarized below:
o
Without access to the Jack’s Marina site, all of these options would impact a designated
DCNR Natural Area, which requires approval from the Bureau Director. Jeff Johns stated
that the Bureau Director has indicated that the Bureau would not support any of these
options.
o
DCNR also is not supportive of owning and maintaining a new bridge crossing of the
Neshaminy Creek.
43
o
x
Based on the points noted above, the group decided to drop Alts. 3a-c from
consideration.
Summary/Next Steps
o
Alt. 1a is the preferred alternative and UE will focus the remainder of their trail
feasibility work on this alternative. For the options associated with this alternative, 1a-1
and 1a-3 are preferred with 1a-2 and 1a-4 as backup options.
o
PEC would like to hold a public meeting once Alt. 1a has been investigated in more
detail, most likely in September. Action: In coordination with Bristol Township’s
Environmental Advisory Council (EAC), PEC will develop a strategy for the meeting,
including timing, location, and format.
o
A final Steering Committee meeting will be held once UE has completed their trail
feasibility work and CRA has largely completed their ecological restoration analysis.
Interim deliverables will be reviewed via email.
The meeting ended at approximately 11:30 am.
44
December 2013
Stakeholder Meeting with Bensalem Township (August 20, 2013)
x
Tony noted that the Township bought one of the wetland parcels north of State Road between the creek
and Haunted Lane with Bucks County Open Space funds and then transferred the parcel to NSP. He said
the Township could potentially assist with acquisition of the adjacent private wetland parcel for the
widened embankment, if necessary.
x
Ron noted that the Township is currently conducting preliminary design of a new road connection
between Haunted Lane and Winks Lane. This new road would allow trucks going to/from Haunted Lane
to bypass the intersection with State Road, and therefore may be a factor in the consideration of a new
signal at Haunted Lane/State Road.
x
John presented draft Ecological Concepts for four (4) areas within NSP. Susan said that she and Josh
Swartley (NSP Park Manager) visited these sites last week and they are both supportive of the concepts.
Attendees agreed that the wetland expansion (Area 1) and vernal pool creation (Area 2) concepts could
have a higher priority because they would help to mitigate potential wetland impacts from Alt. 1a-1.
Susan added that the interpretive signage and benches proposed for each area are worthwhile elements
to retain.
x
Tony noted that the Philadelphia Eagles sponsored a reforestation effort in NSP (called Eagles Forest,
the 6.5 acre site was planted in 2008 to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions). It may be worthwhile to
investigate similar partnering/funding opportunities for Area 3.
x
Summary/Next Steps
Coordination Meeting with Bensalem Township
Bensalem Township Municipal Building
August 20, 2013, 9:00 am -10:30 am
Present:
Tony Belfield, Bensalem Township (Township)
Ron Gans, Bensalem Township (Township)
Sue Myerov, Pennsylvania Environmental Council (PEC)
John Federico, Urban Engineers (UE)
Meeting Summary:
x
John reviewed the project history including past meetings with the Philadelphia Regional Port Authority
(PRPA) and the Steering Committee.
x
John presented an overview of the crossing alternatives, including a screening matrix (attached). John
reported that there was consensus at the June 5, 2013 Steering Committee meeting that Alt. 1a-1 (State
Road Corridor) is the preferred alternative, for the following reasons:
x
o
Due to cost factors and environmental concerns, DCNR is not supportive of owning and
maintaining a new bridge crossing of the Neshaminy Creek, which eliminated Alts. 2 through 4.
o
Of the Alt. 1 variations, stakeholders preferred Alt. 1a because it utilizes the existing State Road
Bridge and does not require a new crossing. The new pedestrian bridge (Alt. 1d) wasn’t chosen
because it will be costly and the potential impacts were projected to be too great, especially the
private property impact(s) on the north side of the bridge. Therefore, the Steering Committee
decided to move forward with the existing sidewalk option (Alt. 1a) for this corridor.
o
Alt. 1a-1 was the preferred option on the Bensalem side because it would bring the path
immediately into Neshaminy State Park (NSP) and avoid frontage impacts along the north side
of State Road. Either a full or pedestrian-actuated signal is recommended at the Haunted
Lane/State Road intersection to accommodate trail users crossing both Haunted Lane and State
Road. John pointed out that a signal at this location would also accommodate the planned
Neshaminy Creek trail alignment, which also crosses State Road at Haunted Lane. Alt. 1a-2
would be the backup option if a new signal is not feasible.
o
Sue will arrange a meeting with Bristol Township to discuss this project with Township officials;
in particular the proposed alignment along State Road. Action: PEC to coordinate meeting with
Bristol Township.
o
PEC is planning to hold a joint public meeting once Alt. 1a-1 has been vetted through both
Bensalem and Bristol Townships (most likely in September or October). Tony suggested the
Playmasters Theatre building in NSP would be an ideal location due to its proximity, AV setup,
and availability of parking. He also said the Township website and cable access station could be
used to advertise the meeting and/or share information about the project as it moves forward.
Action: Sue will coordinate with Josh Swartley to determine if Playmasters is available for the
meeting.
o
A final Steering Committee meeting will be held either before or after the public meeting,
depending on the timing and what needs to be discussed (to be determined).
o
Susan noted that the grant for this project expires at the end of this year (2013).
The meeting ended at approximately 10:30 am.
Tony and Ron were supportive of Alt. 1a-1 and felt that some type of signal could be feasible at the
Haunted Lane/State Road intersection. After receiving electronic copies from UE, Tony will forward the
meeting materials to the Township Engineer, Traffic Engineer, and Planning Department for review. He
will ask for a response within the next 2-3 weeks. Action: Tony will forward the meeting materials to
the appropriate Township parties for review.
2
1
December 2013
45
Stakeholder Meeting with Bristol Township (October 2, 2013)
x
Glenn informed the group that, in the mid-2000’s, Bristol Township received grant funding to implement
a Streetscape Improvement project along State Road. However, the Township Council decided not to
move forward with the project due to significant opposition from the public. Before it was halted, the
project was in preliminary design and would have included new curbs, sidewalks, and crosswalks across
State Road. There are currently no plans for streetscape improvements along State Road.
x
Glenn mentioned that the property at the southwest corner of State Road and Cedar Avenue is actively
pursuing redevelopment. He also noted that the Neshaminy Creek Brewing Company, which is located
along Cedar Avenue just south of State Road, could be a potential amenity/destination for trail users.
x
Scott asked about what type of crossing is proposed at the 4th Avenue/State Road intersection. Dave
responded that the relatively high traffic volumes and posted speed on State Road may necessitate
more than just signage and striping; candidate treatments could include a pedestrian-activated flashing
beacon or a “flashing” overhead signal. The exact treatment would need to be established and
coordinated with PennDOT during the project’s design phase.
x
Scott asked about who would be responsible for funding this project. John responded that the project’s
capital costs would likely be covered by either State or Federal grant funding, but not by local
governments. Maintenance costs would vary depending on the facility.
x
Scott added that maintenance costs for any new type of traffic signal, including a flashing signal, would
likely be a local responsibility and would need Council approval. He added that the Township will be
responsible for a flashing signal to be installed near the intersection of Green Lane and Route 13 to
accommodate the D&N Canal Trail. Action: UE to investigate maintenance responsibilities for new
traffic signals accommodating ECG facilities.
x
Summary/Next Steps
Coordination Meeting with Bristol Township
Bristol Township Municipal Building
October 2, 2013, 2:00 pm -3:00 pm
Present:
Glenn Kucher, Bristol Township (Township)
Scott Swichar, Bristol Township (Township)
Sue Myerov, Pennsylvania Environmental Council (PEC)
John Federico, Urban Engineers (UE)
Dave Cox, Urban Engineers (UE)
Meeting Summary:
x
John presented an overview of the crossing alternatives, including a screening matrix (attached). John
reported that there was consensus at the June 5, 2013 Steering Committee meeting that Alt. 1a (State
Road Corridor) is the preferred alternative, for the following reasons:
o
Due to cost factors and environmental concerns, DCNR is not supportive of owning and
maintaining a new bridge crossing of the Neshaminy Creek, which eliminated Alts. 2 through 4.
o
Of the Alt. 1 variations, stakeholders preferred Alt. 1a because it utilizes the existing State Road
Bridge and does not require a new crossing. The new pedestrian bridge (Alt. 1d) wasn’t chosen
because it will be costly and the potential impacts were projected to be too great, especially the
private property impact(s) on the north side of the bridge. Therefore, the Steering Committee
decided to move forward with the existing sidewalk option (Alt. 1a) for this corridor.
o
Alt. 1a-3 was the preferred option on the Bristol side of the bridge because it would avoid
parking & access impacts to businesses along the north side of State Road between 4th Avenue
and Cedar Avenue. This option would add a two-way bike path on the north side of State Road
until 4th Avenue, where the path would cross State Road and then proceed south on 4th Avenue
as a “share-the-road” condition. An improved pedestrian crossing is recommended at the 4th
Avenue/State Road intersection to accommodate the State Road crossing.
PEC is planning to hold a joint public meeting in either October or November. Sue is
coordinating with Josh Swartley to use the Playmasters Theatre building in Neshaminy State
Park. Glenn said that the Township’s website could be used to advertise the meeting. Action:
Sue will coordinate with Josh Swartley to schedule a public meeting.
o
A final Steering Committee meeting will be held after the public meeting.
o
Susan noted that the grant for this project expires at the end of this year (2013).
The meeting ended at approximately 3:00 pm.
x
The Township asked why the proposed trail alignment uses 4th Avenue instead of Cedar Avenue to
access River Road. John said this route was selected primarily to avoid parking & access impacts to
businesses along the north side of State Road.
x
Following this discussion, Glenn and Scott expressed their support for Alt. 1a-3 and noted that some
type of improved crossing would be desirable at the 4th Avenue/State Road intersection. Glenn asked if
the Township could retain copies of the draft plans. Action: UE to forward the meeting materials to
Scott.
2
1
46
o
December 2013
Public Meeting - Summary (November 6, 2013)
th
A Public Meeting was held on November 6 , 2013 from 5:00pm to 7:00pm at The Playmasters Theatre in Neshaminy State Park to gather feedback from local residents and
answer questions about the project. The Study Team delivered a slideshow presentation covering the project background, bridge/trail feasibility analysis, and ecological
restoration concepts. The presentation was followed by a series of questions and comments, which are listed below along with the Study Team’s responses (where relevant):
x
Please provide a link to the plans and presentation on PEC’s website
o Response: PEC will work towards making meeting materials available on their website.
x
Where would bikers and walkers go on 4 Avenue?
o Response: Bicyclists would “share the road” with vehicles, and pedestrians could either walk in the roadway or along property frontages.
x
Concerned over visibility of cyclists at the intersection of 4 Avenue and River Road
o Response: Sight distance will need to be investigated during engineering design.
x
Concerned over safety of pedestrians on 4 Avenue – PennDOT didn’t install sidewalks but they would be useful – along with conflicts between trail users and vehicles on
road
o Response: Shared road segments have been included in other sections of the ECG system and would be consistent with the future ECG treatment on River
th
Road. Signage and pavement markings are recommended and will be important to designate and reinforce the “share-the-road” condition. Sidewalks on 4
Avenue would indeed be beneficial and should be pursued locally.
x
PennDOT conducted a study 4-5 years ago to investigate a center turn lane on River Road.
x
Would like to see an off-road trail along Neshaminy Creek on the Bristol side of the creek (to the north of State Road). The trail should be off-road and be located along
the river because Newportville Road is unsafe for bikers.
o Response: This section is not within the project’s study area. As currently planned, the Neshaminy Creek Trail alignment runs along Haunted Lane in Bensalem
Township and would connect to the ECG at State Road.
x
Why not use the PRPA property for the bridge landing?
o Response: The entire PRPA site is needed for mitigation
x
How will the Bensalem Greenway be funded?
o Response: PEC is currently pursuing construction funding in collaboration with Bensalem Township. Funding has been secured for the preliminary and final
design stages.
x
Beware of ice jams in the river, which damaged the State Road Bridge 5-6 years ago
x
What would be the clearance under the new bridges?
o Response: The clearance for new bridges would be slightly higher than the State Road Bridge to accommodate boat navigation.
x
Where are we in the process?
o Response: PEC is currently finishing the feasibility study, and will then pursue funding for preliminary and final design.
x
Thanks for the effort! Your efforts are important both for people’s health and mobility.
th
th
th
December 2013
47
Public Meeting to Present Findings of the
East Coast Greenway - Neshaminy Creek Crossing Feasibility Study
East Coast Greenway - Neshaminy Creek Crossing
Feasibility Study
Hosted by the Pennsylvania Environmental Council (PEC)
DATE:
PLACE:
TIME:
SCHEDULE:
Wednesday, November 06, 2013
The Playmasters Theater at Neshaminy State Park
3401 State Road, Bensalem PA 19020
(just north of Winks Lane)
5:00pm to 7:00pm
Welcome to the
WƵďůŝĐDĞĞƟŶŐ
5:00-6:00 PM – Open House to view plans and ask questions of the Project Team
6:00-7:00 PM – Presentation followed by Questions & Answers
2)
Chris
oad
(SR
200
e
ily Av
ing
4th
e
d Av
Ave
ylan
n
w
Bro
e
Av
Mar
Em
te R
Sta
m
Wyo
Ave
e
ty Av
1st
Ave
Ave
e
Av
e
Av
Bensalem
Township
York
2nd
5th
6th
Please join us as we present the findings of the Neshaminy Creek Crossing Feasibility Study, which reviewed
alternatives for extending the East Coast Greenway across the Neshaminy Creek in Bristol and Bensalem
Townships. This study also developed ecological restoration concepts for key areas within Neshaminy State
Park. We would like to gather feedback from the community prior to finalizing the study.
New
e
r Av
Ceda 2011)
(SR
Ave
3rd
95
Rosa
e
Av
e
er Av
Mill
Ro
e
r Av
r Rd
sa
Rive
e
Av
ks
Win
Ln
e
or Av
Ave
Ave
a
Ced
6th
5th
2009)
e
er Av
Mill
all
rsh
2
Ln
Ma
Mill
lsi
Exce
Bristol
Township
-d
1a
e
er Av
Ave
Dr
(SR
Haunted Ln
ss
gre
Pro
Phragmites
Dominated
1st
Ave
lig
GA
d EC
ose
p
Pro
Ave
4th
Ave
Ave
3rd
Jack’s
Marina
2nd
th
Pa
sfe
nk
Du
Rd
el Pa
Grav
rry
Neshaminy Creek
l
ve
Gra
S
Sand
Dunes
)
02
20
(SR
ad
Ro
e
t
ta
ent
nm
e
e Av
war
Dela
th
lk
Wa
Neshaminy
State Park
al Dr
Centr
3c
W. Ba
Former
Soil
Factory
sin Dr
E. Ba
3a
nm
lig
sin Dr
rr
sfe
nk
Du
GA
EC
sed
po
Pro
3b
e
Av
e
Av
Elm
Fir
an
g
Lo
t
en
yR
d
r
4
e
war
Rive
Dela
Unpaved Trail
Former Dredge
Disposal Area
For more information, please contact: Susan Myerov, Senior Program Director – Pennsylvania Environmental
Council: smyerov@pecpa.org or 215-545-4570 x102
tĞĚŶĞƐĚĂǇ͕EŽǀĞŵďĞƌϲ͕ϮϬϭϯ
dŚĞWůĂǇŵĂƐƚĞƌƐdŚĞĂƚƌĞĂƚEĞƐŚĂŵŝŶǇ^ƚĂƚĞWĂƌŬ
This project was funded in part by a Keystone Recreation, Park & Conservation Grant administered by the Pennsylvania
Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, Bureau of Recreation and Conservation.
48
December 2013
Press Coverage - Levittown Patch (November 15, 2013)
December 2013
49
50
December 2013
December 2013
51
Lane
nted
Hau
Brown Ave
Approximate
Wetland Area
lat
lF
ida
fT
it o
y
im
wa
.L
od
ox
Flo
pr
Ap
(SR 2
009)
Appendix B - Conceptual Bridge Designs
1a
1b-c
State
Road
(SR
1d
2002
)
6th Ave
100-Y
ear Flo
Neshaminy
State Park
odpla
in
Neshaminy Cr
eek
Approximate
Wetland Area
Dunes
Area
Sources:
State Road - Potential Bridge Alignments
Jack’s
Marina
Bucks County, PA
DRAFT 6.5.13
52
December 2013
Jack’s Marina Topo: PRPA, 2010
N
Jack’s
Marina
(entire site to be used for
wetland mitigation)
e Limit
ximat
Appro
Approximate
Wetland Area
Potential Wetland
Creation Area
(~ 0.80 acres)
Approximate
Wetland Area
t
al Fla
of Tid
Neshaminy
State Park
3a
ear Flo
100-Y
Approximate
Wetland Area
3b
Privately-operated
Marina
odpla
3c
ing G
ved
Trail
npa
Sources:
Jack’s Marina Topo: PRPA, 2010
N
Exist
ing U
Exist
Bucks County, PA
DRAFT 6.5.13
Floodway
Jack’s Marina - Potential Bridge Alignments
Former Dredge
Disposal Area
(Potential Area for
Vernal Pool Creation)
Neshaminy Creek
rave
l
Path
in
Former
Soil Factory
(Potential Area for
Habitat Improvements)
e
~100’ Wid
tion
for Naviga
December 2013
53
Appendix C - Alternatives Analysis Materials
Structure Lengths (ft)
Alt
Name
Bridge
Approach
Total
Wetland (1)
Impacts
Habitat (2)
Impacts
Existing 5' sidewalk on north side of existing bridge
using boardwalk approach
0
815
815
0.10 Ac
Low
Low
No
No
Adequate
$2.0 million
Requires two crossings of State Road
A. Existing Sidewalk - Embankment
Existing 5' sidewalk on north side of existing bridge
using embankment approach
0
0
0
0.20 Ac
Low
Low
No
No
Adequate
$300K
Requires two crossings of State Road
B. Rehab Existing Bridge
Add a 10' wide shared use path to the south side
of the existing State Road Bridge
0
795
795
0.28 Ac
Low
Low
Yes
No
Adequate
not costed
Existing bridge is not capable of carrying
10' wide path without major rehabilitation
C. Replace Existing Bridge
Replace the State Road Bridge to include a shared
use path on the south side
330
795
1125
0.28 Ac
Low
Low
Yes
Potential
Adequate
not costed
Bridge replacement timeframe exceeds
project expectations
D. New Bridge - Boardwalk
New bridge on the south side of existing bridge
using boardwalk approach
330
0
330
0.08 Ac
Low
Low
Yes
Yes
Good
$3.5 million
The property at the north end of the bridge
would likely require a full take
D. New Bridge - Embankment
New bridge on the south side of existing bridge
using embankment approach
330
795
1125
0.28 Ac
Low
Low
Yes
Yes
Good
$2.1 million
The property at the north end of the bridge
would likely require a full take
None
New bridge crossing the creek at the north end of
Jack's Marina into the Dunes area
270
190
460
Low
High
0.06 Ac
Yes
No
Excellent
not costed
Significant habitat impacts in Dunes area
are unacceptable to DCNR and other
stakeholders
340
465
805
0.10 Ac
Low
0.11 Ac
Yes
No
Excellent
not costed
Significant wetland & woodland impacts are
unacceptable to DCNR and other
stakeholders
510
80
590
0.01 Ac
Low
0.30 Ac
Yes
No
Excellent
$2.0 million
Longer span but less impacts to wetlands
450
80
530
0.01 Ac
Low
0.11 Ac
Yes
No
Excellent
not costed
Significant woodland impacts are
unacceptable to DCNR and other
stakeholders
530
80
610
Low
Low
0.48 Ac
Yes
No
Excellent
not costed
Access through marina basin is not
desirable to DCNR and woodland impacts
along creek are unacceptable
Variations
Description
A. Existing Sidewalk - Boardwalk
State Road
Corridor
1
Jacks
Marina /
North
2
A. Low Ground - Perpendicular
Jacks
Marina /
South
3
B. High Ground - Skewed
C. High Ground - Perpendicular
4
Basin Area
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
54
Evaluation Criteria
Mature (3)
Woodland
Impacts
None
New bridge crossing the creek at the south end of
Jack's Marina; uses a boardwalk structure to meet
grade on the west side
Jack's Marina; connects directly to high ground on
the west side
Jack's Marina; connects directly to high ground on
the west side
New pedestrian bridge crossing the creek at the
south end of the basin near the mouth of the
Delaware River
Floodplain
Effects
Property
Impacts
User Experience
Est. Cost Crossing (4)
Notes
Notes
"wetland impacts" include both direct and indirect (shading) impacts to tidal and forested wetlands
"habitat impacts" refer to intrusion on potential habitat for unique plant and animal species
"mature woodland impacts" refer to removal of mature woodland areas including Coastal Plain and Silverwood Maple forests
For main crossing only; order-of-magnitude costs do not include trail approaches to structures/embankments, lighting, wetland mitigation, or such as engineering design and CM/CI
Alternative highlighted in GREEN is the initally preferred alternative based on the 2nd Steering Committee meeting
December 2013
Avoid due to slopes and narrow frontage
Frontage
Impacts
Haunted Lane
Lane
AADT = 2,200
Wink
s
Dunksferry Rd
Bensalem
Property
Impacts
Existing
5’-wide
Sidewalk
1a-2
1a
40
1a-2
Bensalem
Greenway
1d
Avoid due to slopes and dense vegetation
AADT = +/- 13,000
Options include Boardwalk & Embankment
Potential
Improved
Crossing
New
Pedestrian
Bridge
Neshaminy Cree
k
1a-1
1a-2
1d
Logan Walk (approx. 11’ wide)
1a 1d
1a-1 1d
N
Bristol
venu
4th A
$YRLGGXHWRSDWKSDUNLQJFRQÀLFWV
AADT = +/- 12,000
1a-3
ek
y Cre
amin
Nesh
1d
3rd Avenue
New trian
Pedes
e
Bridg
5th Avenue
k&
dwal
Boar
35
2nd Avenue
Property
Impacts
6th Avenue
clude
ns in
Optio
1d
1st Avenue
n Ave
1d
ent
1a-4
1a
1a
ankm
Emb
3DWK3DUNLQJ&RQÀLFWV
Cedar Avenue
6th Avenue
e
Brow
Potential
Improved
Crossing
Frontage
Impacts
ing
Exist e
5’-wid k
al
Sidew
35
1a-4
Continues Through To River Road
N
State Road Corridor - Potential East Coast Greenway (ECG) Alignments
December 2013
DRAFT - November 6, 2013
55
Appendix D - Ecological Enhancement Concept Plans
SITE
KEY MAP
INTERSTATE-95
SITE
SITE LOCATION
SCALE: 1" = 1000'
79992-01(PRES001)GN-GB001 AUG 05/2013
56
December 2013
NO
Date
Revision
Initial
INY
HAM
NES
EEK
CR
0
20
60ft
10
8
12
LEGEND
TIDAL WATERLINE
6
0
10
EXISTING CONTOUR
-2
EXISTING BATHYMETRY
16
14
4
4
20
APPROXIMATE
EXISTING
WETLAND
FLOOD PLAIN LINE
FLOODWAY (FEMA)
18
PHOTO #1
4
4
20
16
PHOTO #1
PHOTO #2
EXISTING TRAIL
ALIGNMENT
SCALE VERIFICATION
THIS BAR MEASURES 1" ON ORIGINAL. ADJUST SCALE ACCORDINGLY.
12
Approved
8
EXISTING TRAIL
ALIGNMENT
6
14
DRAWING STATUS
14
4
APPROXIMATE
EXISTING
WETLAND
PHOTO #2
6
RE-ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW
ISSUED FOR CLIENT REVIEW
05-AUG-13
01-AUG-13
Status
Date
S.B.
S.B.
Initial
8
10
NESHAMINY CREEK CROSSING PROJECT
AREA 1
18
SITE PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS
12
12
16
12
14
12
14
16
18
20
20
Source Reference:
Project Manager:
S. BUSH
Reviewed By:
M. KALB
Project N o :
Scale:
1" = 60'
79992-01
Date:
AUGUST 2013
Report N o :
PRES001
Drawing N o :
002
79992-01(PRES001)GN-GB001 AUG 05/2013
December 2013
57
NO
Date
Revision
Initial
INY
HAM
NES
EEK
CR
0
20
40ft
LEGEND
TIDAL WATERLINE
10
10
EXISTING CONTOUR
8
12
4
PROPOSED CONTOUR
FLOODWAY (FEMA)
FLOOD PLAIN LINE
6
0
16
14
4
4
20
2
PLANT WETLAND SEED
MIX AND SHRUBS BELOW
6 FOOT ELEVATION
(0.47 ACRES)
APPROXIMATE
EXISTING
WETLAND
6
18
004
4
2
4
4
EXISTING 24” DIA. RCP
CULVERT
RE-ROUTE TRAIL
AS REQUIRED
SCALE VERIFICATION
EXISTING TRAIL
ALIGNMENT
6
10
16
20
8
12
3
004
CONSTRUCT REST AREA
WITH BENCH AND
INTERPRETIVE SIGNAGE
ABOUT WETLAND
(0.47 ACRES)
14
2
Approved
004
4
6
NOTE: WETLAND CREATION AREA TO BE MONITORED
AND MANAGED FOR A MINIMUM OF 5 YEARS FROM THE
DATE OF CONSTRUCTION TO PREVENT COLONIZATION
BY INVASIVE SPECIES
8
10
WETLAND CREATION AREA
CONNECT NEW WETLAND
WITH EXISTING, TIDALLY
INFLUENCED WETLAND
(0.94 ACRES)
DRAWING STATUS
12
05-AUG-13
01-AUG-13
Status
S.B.
S.B.
Date
Initial
8
EXISTING TRAIL
ALIGNMENT
AREA 1
SITE PLAN
6
14
APPROXIMATE
EXISTING
WETLAND
Source Reference:
14
4ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL IN SUPPORT OF A CONCEPTUAL ECOLOGICAL
Project Manager:
S. BUSH
Reviewed By:
M. KALB
Project N o :
Scale:
1" = 40'
79992-01
Date:
AUGUST 2013
Report N o :
PRES001
Drawing N o :
003
79992-01(PRES001)GN-GB001 AUG 05/2013
58
December 2013
NO
Date
Revision
Initial
AREA 1
PLANTING SCHEME
COASTAL PLAIN NATIVE
TREES & SHRUBS
SEASONALLY FLOODED
WILDLIFE FOOD MIX
(ERNMX-128)
Including invasive species control
COMMON NAME
SCIENTIFIC NAME
QUANTITY
(T) RIVER BIRCH
BETULA NIGRA
40
(T) SWEETGUM
LIQUIDAMBAR STYRACIFLUA
40
(T) SWEET-BAY MAGNOLIA
MAGNOLIA VIRGINIA
40
(T) WILLOW OAK
QUERCUS PALUSTRIS
40
(T) PIN OAK
QUERCUS PHELLOS
40
(S) SMOOTH ALDER
ALNUS SERRULATA
220
(S) BUTTONBUSH
CEPHALANTHUS OCCIDENTALIS
220
(S) SILKY DOGWOOD
CORNUS AMOMUM
220
(S) SOUTHERN ARROWWOOD
VIBURNUM DENTATUM
220
DEERTONGUE
PANICUM CLANDESTINUM
FOX SEDGE
CAREX VULPINOIDEA
RIVERBANK WILDRYE
ELYMUS RIPARIUS
FOWL BLUE GRASS
POA PALUSTRIS
SWITCHGRASS
PANICUM VIRGATUM
VIRGINIA WILDRYE
ELYMUS VIRGINICUS
10 LBS
SHOWY TICKTREFOIL
DESMODIUM CANADENSE
OXEYE SUNFLOWER
HELIOPSIS HELIANTHOIDES
AUTUMN BENTGRASS
AGROSTIS PERENNANS
GREEN BULRUSH
SCIRPUS ATROVIRENS
FORM
DENSITY
CONTAINER
/ 4 FEET
1 TREE / 64 FT 2
(ON SLOPE)
CONTAINER
/ 3 FEET
CLUSTER OF
3 / 64 FT 2
(300 IN WL,
140 ON SLOPE)
SEEDMIX
20 LB /
ACRES
SPREAD EVENLY
THROUGHOUT
WETLAND AREA
BELOW 6 FEET IN
ELEVATION
SCALE VERIFICATION
DETAIL
1
N.T.S.
003
ESTIMATED PROJECT COST
Approved
DETAIL
2
N.T.S.
003
PLANTING TABLE
DRAWING STATUS
05-AUG-13
01-AUG-13
Status
Date
S.B.
S.B.
Initial
AREA 1
ECOLOGICAL ENHANCEMENT
& RESTORATION DETAILS
Source Reference:
DETAIL
3
N.T.S.
003
RESTING AREA
Project Manager:
S. BUSH
Reviewed By:
M. KALB
Project N o :
Scale:
N.T.S.
79992-01
Date:
AUGUST 2013
Report N o :
PRES001
Drawing N o :
004
79992-01(PRES001)GN-GB001 AUG 05/2013
December 2013
59
SITE
KEY MAP
INTERSTATE-95
SITE
SITE LOCATION
SCALE: 1" = 1000'
79992-01(PRES001)GN-GB002 AUG 05/2013
60
December 2013
NO
Date
Initial
14
Revision
20
20
18
16
12
22
22
20
EXISTING TRAIL
ALIGNMENT
10
16
0
20
60ft
6
20
LEGEND
14
10
EXISTING CONTOUR
-2
EXISTING BATHYMETRY
8
20
18
18
PHOTO #2
FLOOD PLAIN LINE
12
16
14
4
12
8
PHOTO #1
10
8
10
6
0
PHOTO #1
8
6
4
18
14
12
4
10
16
4
4
APPROXIMATE
EXISTING
WETLAND
14
SCALE VERIFICATION
EXISTING TRAIL
ALIGNMENT
2
12
Approved
TIDAL WATERLINE
NESHAMINY CREEK
FLOODWAY (FEMA)
DRAWING STATUS
PHOTO #2
05-AUG-13
01-AUG-13
Status
Date
S.B.
S.B.
Initial
EXISTING TRAIL
ALIGNMENT
AREA 2
SITE PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS
FLO
OD
Source Reference:
DELAWARE RIVER
(TIDAL)
EBB
Project Manager:
S. BUSH
Reviewed By:
M. KALB
Project N o :
Scale:
1" = 60'
79992-01
Date:
AUGUST 2013
Report N o :
PRES001
Drawing N o :
002
79992-01(PRES001)GN-GB002 AUG 05/2013
December 2013
61
NO
Date
Initial
20
Revision
16
10
14
6
20
PLANT WETLAND SEED MIX
BELOW 6 FOOT ELEVATION
(0.40 ACRES)
2
004
18
8
20
(0.49 ACRES)
18
2
004
0
LEGEND
6
10
NOTE: VERNAL POOL CREATION AREA TO BE
MONITORED AND MANAGED FOR A MINIMUM OF 5
YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CONSTRUCTION TO
PREVENT COLONIZATION BY INVASIVE SPECIES
12
EXISTING CONTOUR
4
4
16
40ft
8
2
14
20
12
VERNAL POOL CREATION AREA
CREATE SEVERAL VERNAL POOLS
WITH VARYING ELEVATIONS
(0.89 ACRES)
4
PROPOSED CONTOUR
FLOOD PLAIN LINE
8
10
8
8
2
4
6
8
EXISTING TRAIL
ALIGNMENT
14
6
2
0
10
4
18
6
4
FLOODWAY (FEMA)
8
6
TIDAL WATERLINE
16
10
14
Approved
CREEK
2
12
4
NESHAMINY
APPROXIMATE
EXISTING
WETLAND
SCALE VERIFICATION
4
4
DRAWING STATUS
05-AUG-13
01-AUG-13
Status
S.B.
S.B.
Date
Initial
AREA 2
SITE PLAN
EXISTING TRAIL
ALIGNMENT
FLO
DELAWARE RIVER
(TIDAL)
EBB
OD
Source Reference:
Project Manager:
S. BUSH
Reviewed By:
M. KALB
Project N o :
Scale:
1" = 40'
79992-01
Date:
AUGUST 2013
Report N o :
PRES001
Drawing N o :
003
79992-01(PRES001)GN-GB002 AUG 05/2013
62
December 2013
NO
Date
Revision
Initial
AREA 2
PLANTING SCHEME
TREES & SHRUBS
SEASONALLY FLOODED
WILDLIFE FOOD MIX
(ERNMX-128)
COMMON NAME
SCIENTIFIC NAME
QUANTITY
FORM
DENSITY
(T) RIVER BIRCH
BETULA NIGRA
200
CONTAINER
/ 4 FEET
1 TREE / 64 FT 2
CONTAINER
/ 3 FEET
CLUSTER OF
3 / 64 FT 2
SEEDMIX
20 LB /
ACRES
SPREAD EVENLY
IN GRADED
VERNAL POOLS
(S) SMOOTH ALDER
ALNUS SERRULATA
200
(S) BUTTONBUSH
CEPHALANTHUS OCCIDENTALIS
200
DEERTONGUE
PANICUM CLANDESTINUM
FOX SEDGE
CAREX VULPINOIDEA
RIVERBANK WILDRYE
ELYMUS RIPARIUS
FOWL BLUE GRASS
POA PALUSTRIS
SWITCHGRASS
PANICUM VIRGATUM
VIRGINIA WILDRYE
ELYMUS VIRGINICUS
SHOWY TICKTREFOIL
DESMODIUM CANADENSE
5 LBS
OXEYE SUNFLOWER
AUTUMN BENTGRASS
AGROSTIS PERENNANS
GREEN BULRUSH
SCIRPUS ATROVIRENS
SCALE VERIFICATION
Approved
DETAIL
1
N.T.S.
003
DETAIL
2
N.T.S.
003
PLANTING TABLE
DRAWING STATUS
05-AUG-13
01-AUG-13
Status
Date
S.B.
S.B.
Initial
AREA 2
Source Reference:
Project Manager:
S. BUSH
Reviewed By:
M. KALB
Project N o :
Scale:
N.T.S.
79992-01
Date:
AUGUST 2013
Report N o :
PRES001
Drawing N o :
004
79992-01(PRES001)GN-GB002 AUG 05/2013
December 2013
63
SITE
KEY MAP
INTERSTATE-95
SITE
SITE LOCATION
SCALE: 1" = 1000'
79992-01(PRES001)GN-GB003 AUG 05/2013
64
December 2013
12
12
NO
Date
Revision
Initial
16
12
14
14
20
20
18
16
12
22
22
20
EXISTING TRAIL
ALIGNMENT
0
20
60ft
10
16
LEGEND
PHOTO #2
10
EXISTING CONTOUR
-2
EXISTING BATHYMETRY
14
20
FLOOD PLAIN LINE
8
20
18
18
12
16
14
12
4
PHOTO #1
8
PHOTO #1
10
8
6
0
10
6
4
18
14
12
SCALE VERIFICATION
8
Approved
14
4
10
16
4
4
APPROXIMATE
EXISTING
WETLAND
2
12
EXISTING TRAIL
ALIGNMENT
FLOODWAY (FEMA)
DRAWING STATUS
TIDAL WATERLINE
NESHAMINY CREEK
PHOTO #2
05-AUG-13
01-AUG-13
Status
Date
S.B.
S.B.
Initial
EXISTING TRAIL
ALIGNMENT
AREA 3
SITE PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS
FLO
OD
Source Reference:
DELAWARE RIVER
(TIDAL)
EBB
Project Manager:
S. BUSH
Reviewed By:
M. KALB
Project N o :
Scale:
1" = 60'
79992-01
Date:
AUGUST 2013
Report N o :
PRES001
Drawing N o :
002
79992-01(PRES001)GN-GB003 AUG 05/2013
December 2013
65
NO
Date
Revision
Initial
14
20
20
18
16
12
2
004
NOTE: REFORESTATION AREA TO BE MONITORED AND
MANAGED FOR A MINIMUM OF 5 YEARS FROM THE DATE
OF CONSTRUCTION TO PREVENT COLONIZATION BY
INVASIVE SPECIES
REFOREST AREA
(3.14 ACRES)
NOTE: OTHER PORTIONS OF THE “SOIL FACTORY”
PROVIDE SUITABLE AREAS WHERE RESTORING COASTAL
PLAIN MEADOW AND WOODLAND HABITAT WOULD
PROVIDE SIGNIFICANT BENEFITS. THE EXACT LAYOUT
OF THESE ECOLOGICAL ENHANCEMENTS SHOULD BE
VERIFIED WITH PADCNR PRIOR TO FINAL DESIGN.
PROPOSED TRAIL
22
0
20
40ft
20
2
0
LEGEND
10
EXISTING CONTOUR
10
4
PROPOSED CONTOUR
RESTORATION OF COASTAL
PLAIN FOREST AND UPLAND
MEADOW COMMUNITIES
(4.06 ACRES)
16
FLOOD PLAIN LINE
EXISTING TRAIL
ALIGNMENT
14
6
0
20
2
8
20
18
18
INSTALL INTERPRETIVE
SIGNAGE ABOUT
MEADOW AND NATIVE
FOREST RESTORATION
ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL IN SUPPORT OF A CONCEPTUAL
ECOLOGICAL ENHANCEMENT PLAN FOR THE PARCEL SHOWN. THE
USE OF THIS MAP FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE IS AT THE USERS SOLE
RISK AND LIABILITY. THIS MAP SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR
NAVIGATION PURPOSES.
4
12
SCALE VERIFICATION
12
16
14
8
Approved
10
8
0
10
DRAWING STATUS
12
2
14
6
004
18
SELECTIVELY
WITH HERBICIDE.
SPRAY
ENTIRETREAT
AREA AREA
WITH HERBICIDE
TO
ONCE AREA
BEEN TREATED,
PLANT SHOWY
REMOVE
ALLHAS
VEGETATION.
ONCE VEGETATION
IS
MEADOW MIX
(0.92SHOWY
ACRE) MEADOW SEED MIX.
REMOVED,
PLANT
(0.92 ACRES)
4
6
8
TIDAL WATERLINE
16
10
2
FLOODWAY (FEMA)
Initial
FLO
DELAWARE RIVER
(TIDAL)
OD
AREA 3
CREEK
12
14
4
S.B.
S.B.
Date
NESHAMINY
EXISTING TRAIL
ALIGNMENT
APPROXIMATE
EXISTING
WETLAND
05-AUG-13
01-AUG-13
Status
4
4
SITE PLAN
Source Reference:
Project Manager:
S. BUSH
EBB
Reviewed By:
M. KALB
Project N o :
Scale:
1" = 40'
79992-01
Date:
AUGUST 2013
Report N o :
PRES001
Drawing N o :
003
79992-01(PRES001)GN-GB003 AUG 05/2013
66
December 2013
NO
Date
Revision
Initial
AREA 3
PLANTING SCHEME
TREES
COMMON NAME
SCIENTIFIC NAME
QUANTITY
(T) AMERICAN HOLLY
ILEX OPACA
408
408
(T) SWEETGUM
LIQUIDAMBAR STYRACIFLUA
(T) SWEET-BAY MAGNOLIA
MAGNOLIA VIRGINIANA
408
(T) WILLOW OAK
QUERCUS PALUSTRIS
408
(T) PIN OAK
QUERCUS PHELLOS
408
BIG BLUESTERN
ANDROPOGON GERARDII
VIRGINIA WILDRYE
ELYMUS VIRGINICUS
SIDEOATS GRAMA
BOUTELOVA CURTIPENDULA
INDIANGRASS
SORGHASTRUM NUTANS
PARTRIDGE PEA
CHAMACRISTA FASCICULATA
DETAIL
1
N.T.S.
003
DENSITY
CONTAINER
/ 4 FEET
1 TREE / 64 FT 2
BLACKEYED SUSAN
RUDBECKIA HIRTA
OHIO SPIDERWORT
TRADESCANTIA OHIENSIS
SCALE VERIFICATION
TALL WHITE BEARDTONGUE
PENSTEMON DIGITALIS
MARSH BLAZING STAR
SHOWY NATIVE WILDLIFE &
GRASS MIX (ERNMX-153)
FORM
LIATRUS SPICATA
HAIRY BEARDTONGUE
PENSTEMON HIRSUTUS
ZIGZAG ASTER
SYMPHYOTRICHUM PRENANTHOIDES
NEW ENGLAND ASTER
SYMPHYOTRICHUM NOVAE-ANGLIAE
WILD SENNA
CASSIA HEBECARPA
OXEYE SUNFLOWER
AUTUMN BENTGRASS
ARGOSTIS PERENNANS
BLUE FALSE INDIGO
BAPTISIA AUSTRALIS
MARYLAND SENNA
CASSIA MARILANDICA
EARLY GOLDENROD
SOLIDAGO JUNCEA
WILD BERGAMOT
MONARDA FISTULOSA
ORANGE CONEFLOWER
RUDBECKIA FULGIDA
Approved
20 LBS
SEEDMIX
20 LB / ACRES
DRAWING STATUS
05-AUG-13
01-AUG-13
Status
BUTTERFLY MILKWEED
Date
S.B.
S.B.
Initial
ASCLEPIAS TUBEROSA
DETAIL
2
N.T.S.
003
PLANTING TABLE
AREA 3
Source Reference:
Project Manager:
S. BUSH
Reviewed By:
M. KALB
Project N o :
Scale:
N.T.S.
79992-01
Date:
AUGUST 2013
Report N o :
PRES001
Drawing N o :
004
79992-01(PRES001)GN-GB003 AUG 05/2013
December 2013
67
SITE
KEY MAP
INTERSTATE-95
SITE
SITE LOCATION
SCALE: 1" = 1000'
79992-01(PRES001)GN-GB004 AUG 01/2013
68
December 2013
NO
Date
Revision
Initial
8
0
0
10
20ft
LEGEND
0
2
4
10
8
6
10
EXISTING CONTOUR
-2
EXISTING BATHYMETRY
FLOOD PLAIN LINE
PHOTO #2
PHOTO #1
RIVERBANK
EROSION
1
SCALE VERIFICATION
004
Approved
PHOTO #1
0
2
DRAWING STATUS
4
10
8
6
PHOTO #2
TIDAL WATERLINE
01-AUG-13
Status
Date
S.B.
Initial
FLO
AREA 4
OD
SITE PLAN
EXISTING CONDITIONS
DELAWARE RIVER
(TIDAL)
EBB
Source Reference:
Project Manager:
S. BUSH
Reviewed By:
M. KALB
Project N o :
Scale:
1" = 40'
79992-01
Date:
AUGUST 2013
Report N o :
PRES001
Drawing N o :
002
79992-01(PRES001)GN-GB004 AUG 01/2013
December 2013
69
NO
Date
Revision
Initial
WILLOW
PLANTINGS
EXTREME HIGH TIDES & STORMS
ELEVATION 10
ELEVATION 6
ROCK
RIPRAP
MEAN HIGH TIDE
ELEVATION 4
MEAN LOW TIDE
TREE/SHRUB
PLANTINGS
POROUS BLOCK
POROUS BLOCK
RIVER
IRREGULARLY FLOODED
UPLAND BUFFER
BANKFACE
ELEVATION -2
REGULARLY FLOODED
NATURAL INTERTIDAL WETLAND VEGETATION
SUBTITAL WATERS
CROSS SECTION
NOTE: SHORELINE TO BE MONITORED AND MANAGED FOR
A MINIMUM OF 5 YEARS FROM THE DATE OF CONSTRUCTION
TO PREVENT COLONIZATION BY INVASIVE SPECIES
ENVIRONMENTAL COUNCIL IN SUPPORT OF A CONCEPTUAL
ECOLOGICAL ENHANCEMENT PLAN FOR THE PARCEL SHOWN. THE
USE OF THIS MAP FOR ANY OTHER PURPOSE IS AT THE USERS SOLE
RISK AND LIABILITY. THIS MAP SHOULD NOT BE USED FOR
NAVIGATION PURPOSES.
Mp
Ca
Mp
Sn
Sn
Sn
Sn
SCALE VERIFICATION
TREE/SHRUB
PLANTINGS
Ca
Ca
Vd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Vd
Sd
Sd
Approved
Mp
Vd
Vd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Sd
Sd
WILLOW
PLANTINGS
Sd
DRAWING STATUS
ROCK
RIPRAP
RIVER
01-AUG-13
Status
S.B.
Date
Initial
NOTE: UPSTREAM AND DOWNSTREAM ENDS OF
TREATMENT MUST BE KEYED INTO EXISTING BANK
AREA 4
SITE PLAN
PLAN VIEW
Source Reference:
DETAIL
1
N.T.S.
002
SHORELINE EROSION CONTROL
Project Manager:
S. BUSH
Reviewed By:
M. KALB
Project N o :
Scale:
1" = 40'
79992-01
Date:
AUGUST 2013
Report N o :
PRES001
Drawing N o :
003
79992-01(PRES001)GN-GB004 AUG 01/2013
70
December 2013
NO
Date
Revision
Initial
AREA 4
PLANTING SCHEME
TREES & SHRUBS
WATER'S EDGE
DETAIL
2
N.T.S.
003
COMMON NAME
SCIENTIFIC NAME
MAP SYMBOL
QUANTITY
SWEET PEPPER-BUSH
CLETHRA ALNIFOLIA
Ca
50
NORTHERN BAYBERR
MYRICA PENSYLVANICA
Mp
50
SOUTHERN ARROWWOOD
VIBURNUM DENTATUM
Vd
50
BLACK WILLOW
SALIX NIGRA
Sn
50
PUSSY WILLOW
SALIX DISCOLOR
Sd
300
DETAIL
3
N.T.S.
003
FORM
DENSITY
CONTAINER
/ 3 FEET
CLUSTERS
OF 3 / 64 FT 2
LIVE
STAKES
1 / 9 FT 2 IN 3
ROWS
PLANTING TABLE
SCALE VERIFICATION
Approved
DRAWING STATUS
01-AUG-13
Status
Date
S.B.
Initial
AREA 4
Source Reference:
Project Manager:
S. BUSH
Reviewed By:
M. KALB
Project N o :
Scale:
N.T.S.
79992-01
Date:
AUGUST 2013
Report N o :
PRES001
Drawing N o :
004
79992-01(PRES001)GN-GB004 AUG 01/2013
December 2013
71
Appendix E - ECG Conceptual Cost Estimate
72
December 2013
Improvement Type
Segment A
Segment B
Segment C
(Dunksferry to Haunted)
(Haunted through Bridge)
(Bridge to River Road)
Unit
Unit Cost
Qty
Trail Items
12' Wide Asphalt Trail (within NSP)
10' Wide Asphalt Sidepath (along State Rd)
Subbase for Asphalt Trail
Site Clearing & Preparation
SY
SY
CY
AC
$45
$45
$30
$8,000
1720
0
1720
0.20
$
$
$
$
77,400
51,600
1,600
0
910
910
0.65
$
$
$
$
41,000
27,300
5,200
0
922
922
0
$
$
$
$
41,500
27,700
-
1720
1832
3552
0.85
$
$
$
$
77,400
82,500
106,600
6,800
Roadway Items
Widen Embankment (Fill + Stabilization)
Roadway Fill
Concrete Curb
Pavement Removal
Traffic Signal Installation (Haunted Lane)
Intersection Improvements (4th Avenue)
Drainage Improvements
Utility Pole Relocations
CY
CY
LF
SY
LS
LS
LS
LS
$75
$60
$40
$47
$150,000
$50,000
$20,000
$50,000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
-
2690
0
910
0
1
0
0
0
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
201,800
36,400
150,000
-
0
738
830
738
0
1
1
1
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
44,300
33,200
34,700
50,000
20,000
50,000
2690
738
1740
738
1
1
1
1
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
201,800
44,300
69,600
34,700
150,000
50,000
20,000
50,000
$
894,000
General Items (Project-Wide)
Contractor Mobilization
Maintenance & Protection of Traffic
Signage/Striping
Landscaping
$
$
$
$
40,000
15,000
10,000
10,000
Construction Total
$
969,000
Design Engineering/Permitting @ 15%
$
145,000
Construction Engineering @ 15%
$
145,000
Contingency @ 20%
$
194,000
Construction Subtotal
Cost
Qty
$ 131,000
Project Total
Cost
$ 462,000
Qty
Cost
TOTAL
$ 301,000
Qty
Cost
$ 1,453,000
Notes
(1) All costs are in 2013 dollars
(2) Total cost does not environmental mitigation
December 2013
73